The Court granted an interim injunction restraining Finsure from acting on its purported termination of a Sub-Aggregator Agreement, finding a strong prima facie case that the termination was invalid because there was no evidence that any broker had actually committed or been ancillary to fraud, forgery or material misrepresentation as required by clause 5.1(d) — mere allegations or lender suspensions being insufficient to enliven the contractual termination right. The balance of convenience favoured the injunction because the termination would effectively destroy Hai Money's business and damages would be inadequate, whereas Finsure's claimed reputational and regulatory concerns were unsupported by the evidence and contradicted by Finsure's own conduct in recruiting and onboarding Hai Money brokers. The Court rejected the argument that the injunction would impermissibly force parties into a relationship of trust and confidence, characterising the sub-aggregator relationship as a commercial one where maintaining the status quo pending trial was appropriate.
The full text is available to signed-in members.