Legislator Giurisprudenza & Legislazione
DE FR IT EN
Analizza in Legislator
Loulla Reddaway v. Yola Skaliotou as administratrix of the estate of the deceased Andreas Louca and Another (1967) JSC 486 Generato dall'IA

Interim injunction to preserve building positions refused due to respondent's acceptance of demolition risk.

Numero d'incarto Loulla Reddaway v. Yola Skaliotou as administratrix of the estate of the deceased Andreas Louca and Another (1967) JSC 486
Autorità giudiziaria
Giurisdizione Cipro (CY)
Data della decisione
Esito del giudizio Respinto (Dismissed)
Apri la fonte ufficiale Versione Markdown leggibile dalle macchine (.md)

Sintesi Legislator

Generato dall'IA

The Supreme Court refused an application for an interim injunction to preserve the parties' respective building positions pending the final appeal. The appellant sought to maintain the status quo regardless of the trial court's judgment, while the respondent admitted continuing work and accepted the risk of demolition if the appeal succeeded. The court granted the refusal because the respondent's declaration that no hardship would be raised rendered the injunction unnecessary.

Regesto Legislator

Generato dall'IA

Civil Procedure Act; Interim Injunctions: An application for an interim injunction to preserve position pending appeal may be refused where the respondent declares they accept the risk of the property being altered or demolished.

Parole chiave

Generato dall'IA
interim injunction preserve position pending appeal building works hardship declaration status quo civil procedure azione di manutenzione
Generato dall'IA
Πολιτική Έφεση 380/2012
Appeal dismissed; interim injunction against property sale upheld due to urgency and lack of disclosure.
Αρ.Αγωγής: 5979/04
Court allows cross-examination of witness to clarify procedural irregularity in prior judgment text.
Αρ. Αγωγής: 323/2012
Court grants 3-day extension for appeal filing due to clerical error and immediate action taken by counsel.
Αρ. Αγωγής 2314/2012
Court sets aside default judgment due to lawyer's travel delay and excuses minor procedural error.
Πολιτική Έφεση Αρ. 10334
Supreme Court allows appeal and sets aside default judgment where plaintiff showed good defense and paid costs.

Ti chiedi come si applica questa sentenza alla tua fattispecie?

Analizza questa decisione insieme alla legislazione federale e cantonale, ai commentari e alla giurisprudenza successiva in Legislator AI.

Apri in Legislator →

Testo completo

[*486] 1967 April 27

(VASSILIADES P., JOSEPHIDES, HADJIANASTASSIOU, JJ.)

APPELLATE JURISDICATION

Loulla Reddaway,

Appellant-Plaintiff,

v.

Yola Skaliotou as administratrix of the

Estate of the decreased Andreas Louca

and another,

Respondents-Defendants.

(Application in Civil Appeal No.4623).

Injunctions - Interim injunctions pending appeal - Application for an interim injunction to preserve position regarding parties' respective buildings, as it were at the time of the filing of action in trial Court - Regardless of the adjudication of the matter by such trial Court - Application refused on the basis of a statement and a declaration in Court by Respondents' Counsel.

A. Paikkos, for the Appellant.

A. Triantafyllides, for the Respondents.

JUDGMENT

The Judgment of the Court was delivered by: -

VASSILIADES, P.: The dispute between parties is, at this stage of the proceedings, confined to the question whether the applicants (appellants in the appeal) are entitled to an interim injunction to preserve the position regarding their respective buildings, as it were at the time of the filing of the action, regardless of the adjudication on the matter in the trial Court, and the Judgment delivered on April 8, 1967, the subject-matter of the appeal wherein this application is made. [*487]

After the statement made in Court this morning by counsel for the respondents, as to the circumstances under which their building-work was continued after Judgment; and after the declaration made on their (the respondents') behalf that they are taking the risk of having their building demolished, if the appellants are successful in the appeal, and no question of consequent hardship will be raised at the hearing of the appeal, we have no difficulty in reaching the conclusion that the application for an interim injunction must be refused. This, of course, shall in no way prejudice any of the issues which may arise in the appeal, including the question whether the appellants are entitled to the injunction claimed by their action.

The application is, therefore, refused; with costs in cause.

Order in terms.