"Because of the pure breadth and depth of black letter law research and practical guidance that ½Û×ÓÊÓƵ provides, we don't have to rely on counsel as much as perhaps firms that don't use ½Û×ÓÊÓƵ."
KaurMaxwell
Access all documents on Interim remedy
An order for a remedy made before or during the course of proceedings, pending the final resolution of litigation.
Such orders include interim injunctions; search orders; freezing orders; pre-action or non-party disclosure orders; and interim payment orders. The procedure governing interim orders is set out in CPR Rule 23.
Speed up all aspects of your legal work with tools that help you to work faster and smarter. Win cases, close deals and grow your business–all whilst saving time and reducing risk.
For our full legal glossary and more legal research sources, register for a free Lexis+ trial
Defending a claim for judicial review—checklist This Checklist highlights the key preliminary steps and considerations for defending a judicial review claim in the Administrative Court, including preliminary assessment, acknowledgement of service and skeleton arguments. On receipt of pre-action protocol letter Ensure the Pre-Action Protocol for Judicial Review has been followed • The Pre-Action Protocol for Judicial Review should be followed unless extreme urgency or other good reason dictates otherwise. • Failure to follow the pre-action protocol may have cost consequences and should be drawn to the court's attention in the acknowledgement of service. • See Practice Note: Judicial review—time limits and the pre-action protocol. Ensure the claim is within time limit for judicial review • Although it is more of a concern for the claimant, note that the need to comply with the pre-action protocol does not affect the obligation to bring a claim promptly and within three months of the grounds arising (unless an alternative time limit applies). • See Practice Note: Judicial review—time limits and the pre-action protocol...
Procedural guide—application for a freezing order—family proceedings Where there are concerns that a party intends to dispose of assets in a way that will defeat a claim for financial provision, or has already done so, immediate action may have to be taken to secure the assets. Freezing orders (historically known as Mareva injunctions) are an interim remedy and may be made under Family Procedure Rules 2010 (FPR 2010), SI 2010/2955, Pt 20 or under the inherent jurisdiction. An application to restrain future dealings is most commonly made under section 37 of the Matrimonial Causes Act 1973 (MCA 1973) or Schedule 5 Part 14, para 74(2) of the Civil Partnership Act 2004 (CPA 2004). The purpose is to prevent a party removing assets located in England and Wales, or dealing with assets wherever they are located. The applicant has to show that there is a good arguable case against the respondent and a real risk that a judgment will go unsatisfied because of the disposal by the respondent, or that refusal...
Discover our 3 Checklists on Interim remedy
Challenging arbitral jurisdiction and anti-suit measures in Australia This Practice Note considers the following issues: • stay of court proceedings in favour of arbitration • granting anti-suit injunctions by the Australian courts, and • challenging the tribunal's determination on jurisdiction Note that international arbitration in Australia is governed by the International Arbitration Act 1974 (Cth) (IAA). The IAA implements the UNCITRAL Model Law (the Model Law), which is attached at Schedule 2 to the IAA. Some provisions of the Model Law are modified by the IAA. The IAA also implements the New York Convention which is attached at Schedule 1 to the IAA. Note: the Australian and other international judgments referred to in this Practice Note are not reported by ½Û×ÓÊÓƵ® UK. Stay of court proceedings by the Australian courts The Australian courts have the power to stay court proceedings in favour of arbitration under: • section 7 of the IAA • Article 8 of the Model Law, and • its inherent jurisdiction (Vantage Holdings v JHC...
Interim remedies in support of arbitration in Sweden Interim remedies from the tribunal The Swedish Arbitration Act (SAA) applies to all arbitrations which are seated in Sweden, notwithstanding that the dispute may have an international connection (Section 46 of the SAA). As provided under Section 25, paragraph 4 of the SAA, interim remedies, which are referred to as 'provisional and conservatory measures', are available in international arbitration proceedings in Sweden. Section 25, paragraph 4 of the SAA provides that, unless the parties have otherwise agreed, the arbitral tribunal may, on motion of one party, order provisional or conservatory measures. The arbitral tribunal may prescribe that the party requesting the interim measure must provide reasonable security for the damages the opposing party may incur as a result of such interim measure. A similar provision concerning the power to order interim measures is found in the 2023 arbitration rules of the SCC Arbitration Institute (the SCC Rules), Section 37. The most important thing to observe is that decisions...
Discover our 41 Practice Notes on Interim remedy
Are there any particular requirements for the appointment of a receiver in family proceedings? Can a receiver be appointed as an interim measure pursuant to Part 20 of the Family Procedure Rules 2010? The High Court and the Family Court have a general power to grant an injunction (interlocutory or final) to appoint a receiver, where it is ‘just and convenient to do so’, and any such order may be made either unconditionally or on such terms or conditions as the court thinks fit (per section 37 of the Senior Courts Act 1981 which applies to the Family Court as it applies to the High Court). The Civil Procedure rules 1998 (CPR) apply in relation to the appointment of a receiver in family proceedings by virtue of Family Procedure Rules 2010 (FPR 2010), SI 2010/2955, 33.22 which provides: ‘Court’s Power to Appoint a Receiver 33.22 Application of the CPR Part 69 of the CPR applies to proceedings under this Part.’ A receiver may be appointed in existing...
What remedies are available to a supplier who has provided a quote to a prospective customer subject to the terms of a Confidentiality Agreement, but which is undercut by a competitor as a result of the prospective customer breaching the terms of the Confidentiality Agreement? In commerce, there will often be disclosures made, whether in anticipation of a deal or funding or for other economic reasons. See Practice Notes: Know-how and trade secrets and Confidential information. Breach of confidence Know-how and trade secrets may be protected by an obligation of confidentiality either arising under common law or because of specific, contractual terms pursuant to confidentiality clauses or stand-alone non-disclosure agreements (NDAs). In order for there to be a breach of confidence the information needs to: • have the necessary quality of confidence. This means genuine trade secrets and know-how and not: ◦ information that is in the public domain (see: Saltman and BBC v HarperCollins), or ◦ information that forms part of an employee’s...
See the 11 Q&As about Interim remedy
The minutes of the CPR Committee (CPRC) meeting of date 2024 (conducted in a hybrid format at The Rolls Building (Royal Courts of Justice) and via video conference) cover a number of issues including Serious Crime Prevention Orders, amendments to CPR 25 (interim remedies and security for costs), the e-working pilot scheme, the small claims paper determination pilot scheme and costs budgeting light.
Arbitration analysis: The English Commercial Court dismissed a challenge against a London seated partial arbitral award, dismissing claims, inter alia, that the arbitrators should be removed on the basis of justifiable doubts as to their impartiality, alternatively that the arbitrators demonstrated apparent bias against a party and, in the further alternative, that the arbitral tribunal lacked the jurisdiction or power to make interim payment orders, in light of Article 34 of the UNCITRAL Arbitration Rules. The court was not persuaded that the arbitrators’ relevant procedural ruling gave rise to any justifiable doubt as to the arbitrators’ impartiality, which ruling concerned the arbitrators’ decision to admit two last-minute witness statements and preclude cross-examination relating thereto, but with permission to comment on the weight to be attached to the statements. Claims regarding the arbitral tribunal’s lack of substantive jurisdiction and serious irregularity were also dismissed, with the former being given a short shrift by the court. Most notably, the court noted in obiter that the language of Article 34 results in a...
Read the latest 3 News articles on Interim remedy
**Trials are provided to all ½Û×ÓÊÓƵ content, excluding Practice Compliance, Practice Management and Risk and Compliance, subscription packages are tailored to your specific needs. To discuss trialling these ½Û×ÓÊÓƵ services please email customer service via our online form. Free trials are only available to individuals based in the UK, Ireland and selected UK overseas territories and Caribbean countries. We may terminate this trial at any time or decide not to give a trial, for any reason. Trial includes one question to LexisAsk during the length of the trial.
0330 161 1234