Wakim v Wakim

The appeal concerned an application for an injunction brought by the appellant, Mr. Wakim, against the respondent, Ms. Wakim. The dispute centred on the appellant's continued occupation of premises located at 28 Rosemont Street, Punchbowl, New South Wales, from which the respondent sought to evict him. The matter came before the Court of Appeal of New South Wales.

The primary legal issue before the Court of Appeal was whether the appellant had established a sufficient case for the grant of an interlocutory injunction to restrain the respondent from evicting him from the premises. This involved considering whether there was a serious question to be tried, the usual undertaking as to damages, and the balance of convenience, all within the context of case management and the need for expedition.

The Court of Appeal, applying established principles for the grant of interlocutory injunctions, considered the likelihood of the appellant succeeding in the substantive proceedings. The Court's reasoning, though not fully detailed in the provided text, led to the conclusion that an injunction was warranted pending the determination of a related appeal. The Court balanced the potential prejudice to each party and the need to preserve the status quo.

The Court of Appeal ordered that, until its judgment in a specified related appeal or further order, the respondent be restrained from taking any steps to evict the appellant from the premises. The costs of the motion were reserved to be costs in the cause.