Revocation of Interim Measures Following Default Admission Upon Changed Circumstances

The court considered whether previously ordered interim measures, issued after the opposing party failed to respond and was deemed to have admitted the facts, could be revoked when circumstances subsequently changed. The court reasoned that the legal consequence of default under the relevant procedural rule—which presumes the applicant's factual assertions are accepted—cannot perpetually govern an interim measure if the underlying factual situation evolves, as such an interpretation would conflict with the nature of interim relief and established procedural provisions allowing for the revocation or modification of such measures upon changed circumstances.