Baker & McAuliffe Holdings Pty Ltd t/as JSB Lighting v Carey

Baker & McAuliffe Holdings Pty Ltd t/as JSB Lighting sought an interlocutory injunction against Carey and another respondent to restrain them from contacting certain clients of JSB and assisting in three specified projects. The matter was heard by the Federal Court of Australia. The primary legal issues were whether there was a serious question to be tried regarding the validity of a restraint clause in a contract and whether damages would be an adequate remedy for any loss suffered by JSB if the injunction was not granted.

The court found that there was a serious question to be tried regarding the validity of the restraint clause, as it was necessary to determine whether the clause was reasonable and not against public policy. The court also found that damages would be an adequate remedy for any loss suffered by JSB if the injunction was not granted, as the loss could be quantified and compensated accordingly. The court further found that the balance of convenience did not require the injunction to be granted, as JSB had delayed in making the injunction application and there was no evidence of immediate or irreparable harm if the injunction was not granted. The court dismissed the interlocutory application with costs.

The court ordered that the interlocutory application filed on 16 October 2018 be dismissed, that the applicant pay the first and second respondent’s costs of the interlocutory application, and that the proceeding be listed for case management hearing on 19 December 2018 at 10.15 am.