Financial Integrity Group Pty Limited v Scott Farmer (No 2)

The defendants in this case, Financial Integrity Group Pty Limited and Scott Farmer, were subject to an interlocutory injunction that restrained them from certain actions. The second defendant, Scott Farmer, applied for damages due to losses he incurred as a result of the injunction. The application was heard in the Supreme Court of New South Wales. The primary legal issue was whether the plaintiff had provided an undertaking as to damages at the time the injunction was granted. This involved determining if the plaintiff had made a formal commitment to address any damages suffered by the second defendant due to the injunction.

The court examined the circumstances surrounding the granting of the injunction and the documentation related to the proceedings. It was noted that the plaintiff had provided an affidavit in support of the injunction, which did not explicitly mention an undertaking regarding damages. The court found that while the plaintiff had not explicitly stated an undertaking as to damages in the affidavit or in court, the seriousness of the undertaking was implied by the nature of the relief sought and the context of the proceedings. The court concluded that the plaintiff should have reasonably foreseen the potential for damages and thus should have made an undertaking as to damages.

In light of the findings, the court ordered that the parties file written submissions by a specified date to clarify whether the plaintiff had made an undertaking as to damages at the time of the injunction. Additionally, the parties were to indicate if they wished to be heard orally on the matter. This decision emphasised the importance of clear communication and the need for explicit undertakings in legal proceedings to avoid future disputes over damages.