quia timet injunctions

Quia timet [Latin: since he fears; in fear of] injunctions are court orders which restrain the occurrence of an actionable wrong by a defendant in circumstances where the intended defendant threatens to act contrary to the legal rights of the claimant, or threatens to repeat unlawful conduct. The relief is granted on an interim (ie temporary) basis. This form of injunction may be ordered to remain in force until further order of the Court or may be limited by time or the occurrence of an event. Whatever the time that the injunction is to remain in force, the Court will be interested to grant relief in a way so that the order does justice between the parties to preserve the status quo. Quia timet injunctions enable the court to prevent threatened unlawful conduct and remedy its reoccurrence.

Quia timet injunctions and freezing injunctions

There is a distinction to be drawn between quia timet injunctions and freezing injunctions granted by English Courts. To obtain this form of relief, a cause of action need not exist at the time of the application for the order. A prerequisite of obtaining a freezing injunction is that a cause of action must exist at the time of the application to the Court. This is an affirmation that courts will not bring assets within its control in the absence of a crystallised claim by the claimant. A quia timet injunction may be granted to prohibit a threatened but as yet uncommitted unlawful act - typical cases include where the intended defendant/respondent to an application threatens to (1) disclose confidential information which would cause irreparable harm to the claimant (but has not yet done so), or say (2) publish defamatory comments about the claimant.

Instances of circumstances where injunctions may be granted include the threatened infringement of intellectual property rights (copyright, patent, designs, passing off); breaches of contract prior to accrual of actual loss occasioned by the threatened breach; where a person has a right of indemnity from another person and the indemnifier threatens to ignore its obligations; or where a guarantor threatens to act with disregard to its legal obligations.

Applications for Quia Timet Injunctions

Prior to obtaining quia timet relief in England, a claimant must prove to the satisfaction of the Court that there is a real risk that an actionable wrong has taken place or is likely to take place if an injunction was not granted. The court will not be inclined to exercise its jurisdiction where the claimant has a mere unsubstantiated fear that its legal rights might be infringed. The fear must be set out in the evidence in support of the application for the order and be real risk, otherwise such an application would be considered premature. Also, the Court is likely to consider what reasonable steps which the claimant may take and if those steps are likely to prevent the feared or illegal conduct. if so, the court is likely to decline to exercise its jurisdiction and grant an order.

There is no fixed standard of proof for the evidence in support of such injunctions, however the more serious the consequences of the threatened conduct, the more likely the court will entertain an application for relief and may also affect the breadth of the relief that the court is inclined to grant. Applications must in any event be supported by probative evidence.

Nature of Court Orders made

Applications for such injunctions may be made with or without notice to the defendant. As with other forms of interim relief, these injunctions are not a final remedy, and do not bring the dispute to a conclusion or finally and conclusively determine the rights of the parties. Indeed, an applicant will be required to give the usual undertakings as to damages to the Court as a condition of the grant of relief. In exceptional cases, quia timet relief may granted prior commencement of proceedings, however the claimant will probably be required to give an undertaking to the Court that proceedings will be commenced. After the grant of the injunction, the litigation will continue to determine the rights of the parties inter se, subject to agreement between the parties to settle the disputes on terms satisfactory to them.