Golden v Li

The matter before the Court was an application by the plaintiff, Golden, seeking an injunction against the defendant, Li, to restrain the defendant from publishing defamatory material. Golden sought relief on the basis that the defendant had published material that was false and defamatory, causing significant harm to Golden's reputation. The Court was required to determine whether the plaintiff had established the necessary elements to warrant an injunction against the defendant.

The Court held that the plaintiff had not demonstrated that an injunction was necessary to prevent irreparable harm, as the plaintiff had failed to provide evidence of actual or threatened harm that could not be remedied by damages. The Court found that the plaintiff had not established a sufficiently strong case for an injunction, as the evidence presented did not clearly demonstrate that the defendant's publication of the material was imminent or that the harm caused by the publication would be irreparable. The Court emphasised that the plaintiff must demonstrate that an injunction is necessary to prevent irreparable harm, and that the harm must be such that it cannot be remedied by damages.

The Court concluded that the plaintiff had not made out a case for an interlocutory injunction. The Court found that the plaintiff had not established the necessary balance of convenience in favour of granting an injunction. The Court also found that the plaintiff had not demonstrated that an injunction was necessary to prevent irreparable harm. The Court held that the application was therefore refused.

The Court orders that the application is refused.