McPhail v Persons, Names Unknown [1973] Ch 447

Facts

  • The case arose from a dispute over the occupation of property by unknown persons.
  • The plaintiff sought an interim injunction to prevent the defendants from continuing their occupation, alleging trespass and claiming it caused irreparable harm.
  • The court was required to determine if the plaintiff satisfied the legal requirements for an interim injunction and whether summary proceedings were appropriate to resolve the matter.

Issues

  1. Whether the plaintiff had demonstrated sufficient grounds for the grant of an interim injunction.
  2. Whether the procedural requirements for obtaining an interim injunction had been met, including urgency and adequacy of evidence.
  3. Whether the case could be resolved summarily without a full trial or if a full trial was necessary.

Decision

  • The court applied established legal principles to assess the claim for an interim injunction, focusing on the presence of a prima facie case, the balance of convenience, and whether damages would be an adequate remedy.
  • After analyzing the evidence and procedural compliance, the court held that the plaintiff met the necessary standards.
  • The interim injunction was granted to prevent the defendants from continuing occupation.
  • The court found that, given the urgency and the nature of the relief sought, summary proceedings were appropriate in the circumstances.

Legal Principles

  • The equitable jurisdiction to grant injunctions is grounded in the maxim that equity acts in personam, enabling courts to compel or restrain conduct as necessary.
  • Interim injunctions are discretionary and require (i) a serious question to be tried, (ii) consideration of the balance of convenience, and (iii) that damages are not an adequate alternative remedy.
  • Procedural compliance, including timely application and clear evidence of urgency or irreparable harm, is essential for the court's discretion to grant relief.
  • Summary proceedings under the Civil Procedure Rules Part 24 are suitable where there is no genuine dispute of material fact and the matter can be resolved without full trial, provided the evidence is clear and compelling.

Conclusion

McPhail v Persons, Names Unknown [1973] Ch 447 is a leading authority on the grant of interim injunctions and use of summary proceedings, reinforcing the need for urgency, strong evidence, and procedural adherence where immediate relief is sought to prevent irreparable harm pending a full trial.

The answers, solutions, explanations, and written content provided on this page represent PastPaperHero's interpretation of academic material and potential responses to given questions. These are not guaranteed to be the only correct or definitive answers or explanations. Alternative valid responses, interpretations, or approaches may exist. If you believe any content is incorrect, outdated, or could be improved, please get in touch with us and we will review and make necessary amendments if we deem it appropriate. As per our terms and conditions, PastPaperHero shall not be held liable or responsible for any consequences arising. This includes, but is not limited to, incorrect answers in assignments, exams, or any form of testing administered by educational institutions or examination boards, as well as any misunderstandings or misapplications of concepts explained in our written content. Users are responsible for verifying that the methods, procedures, and explanations presented align with those taught in their respective educational settings and with current academic standards. While we strive to provide high-quality, accurate, and up-to-date content, PastPaperHero does not guarantee the completeness or accuracy of our written explanations, nor any specific outcomes in academic understanding or testing, whether formal or informal.
No resources available.

Job & Test Prep on a Budget

Compare PastPaperHero's subscription offering to the wider market

PastPaperHero
Monthly Plan
$10
Assessment Day
One-time Fee
$20-39
Job Test Prep
One-time Fee
$90-350

Note the above prices are approximate and based on prices listed on the respective websites as of May 2025. Prices may vary based on location, currency exchange rates, and other factors.

Get unlimited access to thousands of practice questions, flashcards, and detailed explanations. Save over 90% compared to one-time courses while maintaining the flexibility to learn at your own pace.

All-in-one Learning Platform

Everything you need to master your assessments and job tests in one place

  • Comprehensive Content

    Access thousands of fully explained questions and cases across multiple subjects

  • Visual Learning

    Understand complex concepts with intuitive diagrams and flowcharts

  • Focused Practice

    Prepare for assessments with targeted practice materials and expert guidance

  • Personalized Learning

    Track your progress and focus on areas where you need improvement

  • Affordable Access

    Get quality educational resources at a fraction of traditional costs

Tell Us What You Think

Help us improve our resources by sharing your experience

Pleased to share that I have successfully passed the SQE1 exam on 1st attempt. With SQE2 exempted, I’m now one step closer to getting enrolled as a Solicitor of England and Wales! Would like to thank my seniors, colleagues, mentors and friends for all the support during this grueling journey. This is one of the most difficult bar exams in the world to undertake, especially alongside a full time job! So happy to help out any aspirant who may be reading this message! I had prepared from the University of Law SQE Manuals and the AI powered MCQ bank from PastPaperHero.

Saptarshi Chatterjee

Saptarshi Chatterjee

Senior Associate at Trilegal