The defendants (moving parties) sought an interlocutory injunction against the plaintiffs (responding parties) arising from the termination of a distribution agreement.
The court found that the agreement had been terminated with reasonable notice in August 2015.
The court dismissed the motion for an injunction, holding that the moving parties failed to demonstrate irreparable harm, as they delayed over two years in seeking relief and failed to provide a meaningful undertaking as to damages.
The court also found the balance of convenience favoured the responding parties.
