Carter-Ruck's Own Goal

Wednesday, 14th October 2009

I make no particular comment about this chatty stroll through the ways and means of getting an injunction, save to note that it was written by Nigel Tait, a partner at Carter-Ruck and appears on the firm's website:

In many cases it is clear to the lawyer, within minutes of taking instructions, whether or not the exercise may be worth while or is likely to be successful and, if it is, it is important to explain to the client:
i. the risks of it going wrong; and 
ii. the risks of it going right!

If a client unsuccessfully applies for an injunction it may well draw more attention to the libel or breach of confidence than leaving it alone. The client should be told to foresee headlines such as "The story he tried to ban" or "The photographs they didn't want you to see". A client will also need to be given the best possible idea of the likely costs of both sides and the solicitor needs to be sure that if he is going to instruct counsel he will be covered for their fees by the client!
As to the risks of it going right, a solicitor must explain to the client that if he obtains an injunction it will be necessary to issue proceedings and pursue them vigorously until trial or settlement. Additionally, and most importantly it is necessary to explain the "cross undertaking as to damages" to the client. The position is this. If the client obtains an interim injunction but subsequently the case goes to trial and he fails to obtain a final order the defendant can maintain that he was restrained unjustly and will generally be entitled to damages for any losses that have been sustained.

Emphasis added. Sometimes, mind you, it can all go right (ie, you obtain your injunction) and it still goes horribly wrong.

Filed under: Carter-Ruck (2 more articles) , England (119 more articles) , Lawyers (12 more articles) , Libel law (8 more articles) , Trafigura (1 more articles)

Previous Back to Alex Massie Next

Blogs: Martin Bright | Susan Hill | Melanie Phillips | Coffee House | Faith Based

Actions: Print this article | Email to a friend | Permalink | Comments (2)

Post this entry to: del.icio.us | Digg | Newsvine | NowPublic | Reddit

Post comment

Fergus Pickering

October 14th, 2009 7:32am Report this comment

Carter-Ruck's clients are obviously all born bloody fools, since there is nothing here that they could not have worked outn for themselves by taking five minutes thought. I must say it now seems that injunctions will become a thing of the past until some government decides it willo police the internet, though I mustvadmit I don't see how, since it seems easy to post up child pornography when (I presume) all the apparatus of the State are there to stop in happening. I think big companies and big government are screwed by the likes of Guido, and a bloody good thing too.