Network Ten Pty Limited v Seven Network (Operations) Limited

Network Ten Pty Limited applied for an interlocutory injunction against Seven Network (Operations) Limited and one of its employees. The dispute arose from a restrictive covenant in the employee's contract, which limited his ability to work for competing media companies for a specified period after his employment ended. The court had to determine whether the application for an interlocutory injunction should proceed on discretionary or non-discretionary grounds. Additionally, the court had to consider whether granting an injunction against the employee or the company would effectively force the employee to either work for the plaintiff or remain idle, and whether such an injunction would amount to specific enforcement of a contract of personal service.

The court noted that if the application hinged on the strength of the case for final relief, the applicant must demonstrate a strong likelihood of success at a final hearing. The court also considered the practical effect of granting the injunction against either party. It found that granting an injunction against the employee would essentially force him to either work for the plaintiff or be unemployed, which would amount to specific enforcement of a personal service contract. Similarly, granting an injunction against the company would have the same practical effect as doing so against the employee. The court concluded that neither party would suffer significant prejudice whether the injunction was granted or not, and that the application thus largely hinged on the strength of the case for final relief.

Accordingly, the court declined to grant the interlocutory injunction, stating that the application largely depended on the merits of the case for final relief. The court found that the applicant had not demonstrated a strong likelihood of success at a final hearing, and that the practical effect of granting the injunction would amount to specific enforcement of a personal service contract. As such, the application for interlocutory relief was refused.