Injunction: Difference between revisions

Jump to navigation Jump to search

Injunction (view source)

Revision as of 15:20, 3 March 2020

1,283 bytes removed ,  3 March 2020
no edit summary
No edit summary
No edit summary
Line 1: Line 1:
{{g}}The [[injunction]] is an [[equitable]] [[remedy]] that originated in the English [[Courts of chancery|courts of equity]] to provide redress for wrongs for which an award of money [[damages]] doesn’t quite scratch the itch. An [[injunction]] can be given only when there is "no adequate remedy at law." So, “M’lud I don’t want money. I want him to stop doing what he’s doing, that he promised he wouldn’t.” Obvious examples where this principal is fairly self-evidently so are [[Confidentiality obligation - Confi Provision|confidentiality obligations]].
{{g}}The [[injunction]] is an [[equitable]] [[remedy]] that originated in the English [[Courts of chancery|courts of equity]] to provide redress for wrongs for which an award of money [[damages]] doesn’t quite scratch the itch. An [[injunction]] can be given only when there is "no adequate remedy at law." So, “M’lud I don’t want money. I want him to stop doing what he’s doing, that he promised he wouldn’t.” Obvious examples where this principal is fairly self-evidently so are [[Confidentiality obligation - Confi Provision|confidentiality obligations]].
===injunctions to enforce [[confidentiality agreement]]s===
{{injunctions and confidentiality agreements}}
There common conception, at least among the draughtspeople of [[confidentiality agreement]]s, that one’s express acknowledgement that one’s contractual obligations are not of the type where [[damages]] will be an adequate remedy improve a litigant’s odds of winning an injunction later. It is common see [[confidentiality agreement]]s do just that.
 
But — and here’s the snippy bit — in the commercial world, anything of value is meant to be quantifiable in the dollars and sense. [[Homo economicus]]’ view might be blinkered, it might be philistine — but it conforms to classic economics theory. So in one sense if the right you feel has been infringed, ''it can’t have been very valuable''.
 
And so, in most cases where a [[confidentiality agreement]] bites, it seems: if (boring example) I give you my confidential shareholding arrangements so you can complete your [[KYC]] procedures, or if (racy one) for a fat payoff, you agree a gagging clause to not disclose the terrible things I did to you, and then you go and blab about these things, I might be embarrassed, but I am not likely to suffer pecuniary loss. Even with a customer list, it is likely to be consequential loss (loss of profits) so hard to recover under a normal contract action.


{{sa}}
{{sa}}
*{{confiprov|Remedies}} in the context of our lovely [[Confi Anatomy]]
*{{confiprov|Remedies}} in the context of our lovely [[Confi Anatomy]]
Retrieved from "https://jollycontrarian.com/index.php?title=Special:MobileDiff/40998"

Navigation menu