in substance a mandatory injunction compelling the respondent to provide services it does not wish to provide after the expiration of the contract
requirement of prima facie case and balance of convenience
prima facie case established in respect of the misleading and deceptive representations alleged
Quick Take
1Where an applicant seeking a mandatory interlocutory injunction to compel continued supply of services already has an operational alternative in place, the relief may be characterised as a 'belt and braces' measure, and the balance of convenience will weigh against its grant even where a prima facie case of misleading or deceptive conduct is established.
2An applicant's own conduct in failing to arrange alternative services before the known expiry of a contract, and delay in seeking injunctive relief until after the contract has expired, are factors that weigh decisively against the grant of interlocutory relief.
3Interlocutory injunctive relief that lacks a substantive connection with the controversy between the parties or the final relief sought, and is not necessary to preserve the subject matter of the proceeding, may be refused notwithstanding the establishment of a serious question to be tried.
