Commentary

90.3 Inadequacy of damages and balance of convenience

BAILMENT vol 3(1)
| Commentary

90.3 Inadequacy of damages and balance of convenience

| Commentary

90.3 Inadequacy of damages and balance of convenience

The applicant must normally1 show that damages are an inadequate remedy. The more rare or subjectively precious the chattel, the more readily this criterion is met. The applicant for a mandatory injunction must also show that the injunction is justified on the balance of convenience2, though this factor is immaterial where an owner of goods seeks to recover his admitted property3. An injunction for the delivery up of goods may, however, be refused to applicants who have no acceptable or legitimate commercial reason for seeking this relief rather than, say, satisfaction of

To continue reading
View the latest version of this document, as well as thousands of others like it, sign in to LexisLibrary or register for a free trial