High Court Win: Lyon Croft Law Successfully Defeats Application for Interim Prohibitory and Mandatory Injunctions
Lyon Croft Law is pleased to announce a significant victory for our client in a hard-fought interim injunction application heard before the High Court of Justice in the Rolls Building, London. Acting for the Respondent, our team successfully resisted an application for two interim injunctions, one prohibitory and one mandatory, securing a complete dismissal of the Applicant’s case.
This result is a strong example of how careful legal analysis, robust evidence, and persuasive advocacy can defeat aggressive injunction relief at the earliest stage of commercial litigation.
Background to the Dispute
The dispute arose out of a commercial supply and distribution agreement under which our client, the Respondent, was alleged to have committed to supplying a commercial product to the Applicant, and having granted the Applicant exclusive distribution rights within the Italian market.
The Applicant alleged that, since November 2025, the Respondent had breached the contract by failing to maintain supply and by allegedly supplying the product to third parties in Italy. On that basis, the Applicant sought urgent interim relief from the High Court, asking the Court to grant:
A mandatory injunction compelling the Respondent to continue supplying the product to the Applicant and;
A prohibitory injunction restraining the Respondent from supplying the product to any other party within the region.
The application engaged classic principles of contract law, exclusive distribution rights, cross-border commercial supply, and the well-established test for the grant of interim injunctions in English law.
The Legal Framework: American Cyanamid
The Court considered the application by reference to the long-standing principles set out in American Cyanamid Co v Ethicon Ltd [1975] AC 396, together with the elevated threshold that applies to mandatory interim injunctions.
In summary, the principles include:
Serious issue to be tried: it was common ground between the parties that there was a serious issue to be tried.
The higher threshold for a mandatory injunction: a “good arguable case” is not sufficient. The applicant must satisfy the Court that it has a “high degree of assurance” that it will succeed at trial.
Adequacy of damages: whether damages wouldbe an adequate remedy for either side if the injunction were granted or refused.
The cross-undertaking in damages: the applicant must give a meaningful undertaking to compensate the respondent (and, where relevant, affected third parties) for losses suffered if the injunction is later found to have been wrongly granted.
Balance of convenience and the status quo: including the practicality of the injunction sought.
Why This Result Matters for Our Clients
This outcome is an important reminder of several principles that frequently arise in commercial disputes involving supply agreements, exclusive distribution rights, and cross-border trade:
Mandatory interim injunctions remain difficult to obtain. The “high degree of assurance” threshold is a real and meaningful hurdle, and a well-prepared respondent can defeat such applications even where there is a serious issue to be tried.
The cross-undertaking in damages is not a formality. Applicants seeking injunctive relief that affects markets and third parties must be in a position to demonstrate genuine financial capacity to meet their undertaking.
The Court will not rewrite contracts at the interim stage. Injunctive relief must be grounded in the terms of the agreement actually entered into between the parties. Applications that seek to expand or reshape contractual obligations are vulnerable to challenge.
Practicality and supervision matter. An injunction that cannot sensibly be supervised by the Court is unlikely to be granted.
How Lyon Croft Law Can Help
At Lyon Croft Law, we specialise in high-stakes commerciual litigation and dispute resolution before the English Courts, including the High Court of Justice and the Business and Property Courts in the Rolls Building.
Our experience extends across:
Interim injunctions, including prohibitory, mandatory, and freezing orders;
Commercial contract disputes and breach of contract claims;
Exclusive distribution, supply, and agency agreements;
Cross-border and international commercial disputes, including matters with an Italian and wider European dimension;
Urgent interim relief and emergency applications.
Whether you are seeking to obtain urgent injunctive relief or, as in this case, defending against an agreesive injunction application, our team brings strategic clarity, technical excellence, and persuasive advocacy to every matter we handle.
If your business is facing a commercial dispute, a threatened breach of contract, or an application for interim injunctive relief, we would be pleased to discuss how we can help.
Contact Lyon Croft Law for confidentifal advice on commercial litigation, interim injunctions, or contract disputes, please contact our team to arrange an initial consultation.
This article was written by Abdullah Suker, Managing Director of Lyon Croft Law.
