What factors must be re-evaluated in light of new evidence to maintain an interim injunction?
British Columbia, Canada
The following excerpt is from Encorp Pacific (Canada) v. Rocky Mountain Return Centre Ltd. et al, 2005 BCSC 1700 (CanLII):
In the particular circumstances of this application, the most significant factor that must be re-evaluated in light of the new evidence put forward by the defendants is the relative strengths of the parties’ cases. Although I remain satisfied that the plaintiff has a good arguable case, this does not foreclose a re-evaluation of the relative strength of each party’s case in order to determine whether it is just and convenient to maintain the injunction: Mooney v. Orr at para. 32.
"The most advanced legal research software ever built."
The above passage should not be considered legal advice. Reliable answers to complex legal questions require comprehensive research memos. To learn more visit www.alexi.com.
Other Questions
What are the factors to be considered on an application for an interim injunction? (British Columbia, Canada)
What factors must the court consider when determining whether to modify an interim spousal support order? (British Columbia, Canada)
What is the test for a motion to obtain an interim injunction? (British Columbia, Canada)
Is a collateral benefit or an independent mitigating factor a factor in determining damages for the cost of future care? (British Columbia, Canada)
Can a party who has not produced evidence in favour of their position, or has no reasonable explanation for failing to call the evidence? (British Columbia, Canada)
What is the test for a preliminary injunction under the first element of the injunction? (British Columbia, Canada)
Is a plaintiff required to lead expert evidence to overcome a no evidence motion? (British Columbia, Canada)
What is the legal framework governing interim applications for an interim order? (British Columbia, Canada)
Does a no evidence motion where a real estate agent defendant argued that there was no expert evidence sufficient to establish a standard of care? (British Columbia, Canada)
Is there any evidence that a plaintiff was ready, willing and able to complete her obligations as set out in the interim agreement? (British Columbia, Canada)
