Miao v Michell

Miao (the applicant) sought an injunction to restrain the settlement of the sale of a property. Michell (the respondent) was the trustee in bankruptcy of the applicant. The dispute concerned the applicant's attempt to prevent the sale of a property by the trustee.

The primary legal issue before the court was whether the applicant had established a sufficient basis to grant an interlocutory injunction. This involved determining whether there was a serious question to be tried and, if so, whether the balance of convenience favoured granting the injunction. A further consideration was the applicant's ability to provide a meaningful undertaking as to damages, given their status as an undischarged bankrupt.

His Honour Judge Wilson found that the applicant had failed to demonstrate a serious question to be tried. Furthermore, the court determined that the balance of convenience did not favour the applicant. Crucially, as an undischarged bankrupt, the applicant was unable to offer a meaningful undertaking as to damages, and there was no evidence that the applicant had suffered losses that could not be compensated. Consequently, the application for an injunction was dismissed.