Jane Doe 1 and Jane Doe 2 v Dowling

In the Federal Circuit and Family Court of Australia, the plaintiffs, Jane Doe 1 and Jane Doe 2, sought an urgent interim injunction against the defendant, Dowling, over allegations of defamation. The plaintiffs claimed that Dowling had made defamatory statements about them, causing them significant harm and distress. They sought the injunction on an ex parte basis, meaning that Dowling was not present in court when the application was made.

The court was required to determine whether the power to grant an interim injunction ex parte should be exercised in this case, considering the balance of convenience and the need for exceptional caution. The court needed to assess whether the plaintiffs had demonstrated a strong likelihood of success on the merits, and whether granting the injunction would cause more harm to the defendant than withholding it would cause to the plaintiffs.

The court recognised the exceptional circumstances of the case, noting the urgency and the potential for irreparable harm to the plaintiffs if the injunction was not granted. The court found that the plaintiffs had made out a strong case for the injunction, given the nature of the defamatory statements and their potential impact. The balance of convenience was found to favour the plaintiffs, as the harm they would suffer without the injunction outweighed any potential harm to the defendant. The court exercised its power with the necessary caution and granted the interim injunction, recognising the importance of protecting the plaintiffs' reputations and mitigating further harm.