- When is a case sufficiently arguable for Norwich Pharmacal relief? (Hickox v Dickinson)
- What are the practical implications of this case?
- What was the background?
- What did the court decide?
- Case details
Dispute Resolution analysis: Hickox concerned a claim for Norwich Pharmacal relief in connection with the misappropriation of an 1896 artwork of Paul Signac. The case provides a useful example of the boundaries of the jurisdiction and what must be demonstrated in order to make out the good arguable case needed to obtain an order. Whilst applicants can put forward broadly constructed cases with no requirement to commit to a particular cause of action, the need to demonstrate a good arguable case of wrongdoing generally does not prevent the court having regard to the underlying elements of the causes of action which are put forward. Finally, Hickox demonstrates the benefits of suggesting viable causes of action which do not require proof of knowledge or notice. Written by James Saunders, barrister, at New Square Chambers.
Sign in or take a trial to read the full analysis.
To continue reading this news article, as well as thousands of others like it, sign in to LexisPSL or register for a free trial