Interim injunctions are temporary court orders designed to preserve rights, property or the status quo until the court decides the main dispute.
The general legal basis is section 32 of the Courts of Justice Law, Law 14/1960, together with the court’s equitable discretion and applicable procedural rules.
The applicant usually must show a serious question to be tried, a probability of entitlement to relief and that complete justice would be difficult or impossible without the order.
No. The court still exercises discretion and considers whether it is just and convenient to grant the order in the specific circumstances.
Yes, in urgent cases an ex parte application may be possible, but it is exceptional and requires full and frank disclosure of all material facts.
The order may be discharged and the applicant may face serious consequences, including costs and loss of credibility before the court.
They may arise in disputes involving confidential information, client lists, non-solicitation clauses, company property, retaliation, harassment or urgent employment conflict.
Broad non-compete clauses may be difficult to enforce. Narrow protections focused on confidential information or client relationships may be more defensible depending on the facts.
Contracts, emails, messages, screenshots, access logs, client communications, file transfer evidence, timelines and proof of real risk may all be important.
Yes. A respondent may apply to discharge, vary or oppose the order, especially where there is delay, poor evidence, non-disclosure or excessive relief.
Breach of an injunction may constitute contempt of court and can carry serious legal consequences.
It begins with urgent review of the facts, documents, timeline, evidence, risk, available remedies and whether court protection should be sought or resisted.