X' v 'A' [No 2]

In *X' and ANOR v 'A' [NO 2]*, the New South Wales Court of Appeal considered a dispute between the appellants, X' and another party, and the respondent, 'A'. The case concerned an application for leave to appeal against a decision of a single judge of the Supreme Court of New South Wales.

The primary legal issue before the Court of Appeal was whether the single judge had erred in refusing to grant an interlocutory injunction. This injunction was sought to restrain the respondent from proceeding with a proposed sale of certain shares. The appellants contended that the sale would be in breach of an alleged agreement between the parties.

The Court of Appeal analysed the principles governing the grant of interlocutory injunctions, particularly the requirement for the applicant to demonstrate a serious question to be tried and that the balance of convenience favoured the grant of the injunction. The court found that the appellants had failed to establish a sufficient likelihood of success on the merits of their claim to warrant the grant of an interlocutory injunction. The evidence presented did not sufficiently demonstrate the existence of a binding agreement that would prevent the sale of the shares.

Consequently, the Court of Appeal dismissed the application for leave to appeal, upholding the decision of the single judge.