- Cited — Dr Erica Smith v Dr Christopher Backhouse 2023-07-21
“… prohibit lawful conduct, this cannot be regarded as an absolute rule. The decision of the Court of Appeal in Hubbard v Pitt [1976] QB 142 and Burris v Azadani [1995] 1 WLR 1372 demonstrate that, although the court must be careful not to impose an injunction in wider terms than are necessary to do justice, the court is entitled to rest…”
- Cited — Cant v Seton 2020-07-29
“…is jurisdiction under section 37 in principle to grant an injunction to restrain a threatened tort: see Khorasandjian v Bush [1993] QB 727 and Burris v Azadani [1995] 1 WLR 1372, and an actual tort, such as trespass to the person. The power is not limited to restraining conduct which is in itself tortious or otherwise unlawful. On this…”
- Cited — Canada Goose UK Retail Ltd & Anor v Unknown Persons 2020-03-05
“…ould correspond to the threatened tort and not be so wide that they prohibit lawful conduct. He referred to Hubbard v Pitt [1976] 1 QB 142 and Burris v Azadani [1995] 1 WLR 1372, which had not been cited in Ineos, as demonstrating that, although the court must be careful not to impose an injunction in wider terms than are necessary to …”
- Cited — Cuadrilla Bowland Ltd & Ors v Lawrie & Ors 2020-01-23
“…prohibit lawful conduct, this cannot be regarded as an absolute rule. The decisions of the Court of Appeal in Hubbard v Pitt [1976] QB 142 and Burris v Azadani [1995] 1 WLR 1372 demonstrate that, although the court must be careful not to impose an injunction in wider terms than are necessary to do justice, the court is entitled to rest…”
- Cited — Cuadrilla Bowland Ltd & Ors v Lawrie & Ors 2020-01-23
“… court to disobey the order whether or not the court was right to make it in the first place: see e.g. M v Home Office [1992] QB 270, 298-299; Burris v Azadani [1995] 1 WLR 1372, 1381. In the present case, therefore, it is not open to the appellants to argue that they were not guilty of contempt of court because the Injunction should n…”