Share on LinkedInShare on LinkedIn

ARTICLE · 13 JUNE 2022

Natural Justice In The Context Of Interim Applications

Conyers
Conyers
Contributor
Conyers

Conyers

For over 25 years Conyers’ London office has provided time-zone sensitive advice and support to our...

View firm profile
Explore more from Conyers

It is quite common for a party considering bringing an interim injunction application to weigh, among other things, the risk, by bringing the application, ...

Cayman IslandsLitigation, Mediation & Arbitration

It is quite common for a party considering bringing an interim injunction application to weigh, among other things, the risk, by bringing the application, of having to disclose information to the court and the respondent that they would rather not disclose (in particular sensitive commercial information). The extent of that disclosure is often broadened by the duty of full and frank disclosure which such an applicant bears.

In the very recent decision of Olalekan Akinsoga Akinyanmi v Lekoil Limited Cause No. FSD 382 of 2021 (IKJ), the Grand Court of the Cayman Islands had to consider whether or not an applicant for an ex parte injunction was required to disclose to the respondent information that the applicant had previously provided to the Judge (for the purpose of obtaining and/or continuing the injunction). The issue arose as a result of a confidentiality application that the applicant had made after obtaining the ex parte injunction. The applicant claimed that

We operate a free-to-view policy, asking only that you register in order to read all of our content. Please login or register to view the rest of this article.

The content of this article is intended to provide a general guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought about your specific circumstances.

See more popular content from