The appellant challenged an order granting a mandatory interlocutory injunction requiring removal of identifying information about a young victim after a publication ban.
The Court held that for mandatory interlocutory injunctions, the first step requires a strong prima facie case, not merely a serious issue.
Because the Crown sought the injunction within a criminal contempt proceeding, it had to show a strong prima facie case of criminal contempt and failed to meet that burden.
The trial judge applied the correct framework, so appellate intervention was not warranted.
