Injunctions and Interim Orders in Mauritius

An injunction or interim order is a court order made to preserve a position, prevent a threatened act or require a temporary step while the underlying dispute is decided. In Mauritius, it is an exceptional and fact-sensitive remedy: the applicant must show why ordinary damages or a later judgment may not be enough. Urgency is important, but it does not remove the duty to provide reliable evidence and fair disclosure.

When an injunction is the right tool

Injunctions are often considered where there is a real risk that money, property, confidential information, business goodwill or a legal right will be irreversibly affected before trial. They are not a substitute for a strong final case, and they should not be used merely to gain negotiating leverage. The first task is to define precisely what needs to be stopped or preserved and for how long. A narrow, workable order is more credible than a vague request to prevent all alleged wrongdoing.

The tests the court applies

The court considers the legal right asserted, the seriousness of the issue, the risk of harm, the adequacy of damages, the balance of convenience and the practical effect of an order. The language used in any particular application must match the procedure and evidence before the court. Assertions of urgency are not enough: explain what will happen, when, and why compensation later cannot properly address it. The respondent’s likely case and the impact of restraint must also be addressed candidly.

Ex parte applications and full disclosure

An ex parte application is made without the other side being present. Because it departs from the ordinary right to be heard, it calls for particular restraint and full disclosure of material facts, including adverse documents and arguments. The applicant should not select only the correspondence that helps its case. If time permits, notice may be appropriate; if it does not, the evidence should explain why. Failure to disclose fairly can undermine an order obtained in the other party’s absence.

Undertakings in damages

The court may require an undertaking in damages. In practical terms, this is a promise that the applicant will compensate the respondent if the injunction was wrongly granted and loss resulted. It is not a formality. The applicant should consider whether it has the financial capacity to honour the undertaking and whether evidence is needed on that point. The risk is one reason a client should never seek a sweeping interim order without understanding the commercial consequences.

Preparing the affidavit evidence

Affidavit evidence should be chronological, specific and supported by primary documents. Attach the contract, messages, registry extracts, photographs or records that prove the key events, and identify who has personal knowledge of each fact. Avoid argumentative language and hearsay where direct evidence is available. Make a short chronology with exact dates, preserve original electronic material and explain any delay. For online material, the evidence-preservation principles in online defamation and social-media abuse can be useful.

The return date and inter partes hearing

A temporary order made at the outset will generally be tested when the other side has notice and can respond. At that hearing, the court may continue, vary or discharge the order, or make directions towards a fuller hearing. The applicant should prepare for the respondent’s evidence rather than assuming the original application decides the matter. Both sides should comply exactly with any existing order while they seek a variation. Breach of a temporary order can carry serious consequences.

Breach and contempt

An injunction must be read precisely. If a party believes compliance is impossible, unclear or unfair, the proper course is to seek clarification or variation, not to decide unilaterally that it can be ignored. Deliberate breach can expose a person or company to contempt proceedings and other sanctions. Preserve evidence of the alleged breach, avoid retaliatory self-help and obtain urgent advice. If the dispute concerns a public authority, the separate route of judicial review may need consideration.

Practical preparation before taking formal steps

Urgent relief is best prepared through a disciplined chronology. Put the event that creates urgency first, then identify the documents and witnesses that prove it. Keep the original contract, messages, board records, screenshots and photographs. Make a separate list of material that assists the other side, because the duty of candour in a without-notice application is not met by presenting only supportive facts. The proposed order should say exactly what is to be done or not done, by whom and for what period.

Think through the practical consequences before filing. Can the order be served promptly? Can the applicant comply with an undertaking in damages? Could a limited preservation direction or expedited return date protect the position with less harm than a blanket restraint? These questions make an application more realistic. Once proceedings begin, preserve every subsequent communication and follow the order exactly, even when the other side appears to be acting unfairly.

Related resources: the civil and commercial law hub, data protection, cybercrime law and legal costs.

Timing should be explained rather than assumed. If the applicant knew of the issue for weeks, the affidavit should say what changed and why an urgent order is now needed. Conversely, a respondent should preserve evidence showing that the alleged emergency was avoidable or overstated. The court needs a practical account of the present risk, not a dispute conducted through slogans.

Even a short delay can be material, but it is the explanation and evidence that matter. Preserve the decision trail from the moment the risk is discovered so that the court can understand why the relief sought is necessary now.

This article is general legal information for Mauritius, not legal advice. For advice on your situation, consult a barrister.