Topic 4: Injunctions O'Mahony v Horgan [1995] 2 IR 411 Tracey v Bowen [2005] 2 IR 528 Bambrick v Cobley [2006] 1 ILRM 81 Bennett Enterprises v Lipton [1999] 2 IR 221 Babanaft International Co. SA v Bassatne [1990] Ch 13 Uniformal Lid v Taurus Gemini Real Estate BV [2021] IEHC 245 Anton Piller KG v Manufacturing Processes Lid [1976] Ch 55 Columbia Picture Industries v Robinson [1987] Ch 38 Microsoft Corporation v Brightpoint Ireland Lid [2001]1 ILRM 540 Microstrain Lid v Delany [2021] IEHC 136 Capper (1991) 54 MLR 329 Capper (1995) 17 DULJ 110 Mr Smith instituted proceedings against Mr Jones for breach of contract in circumstances in which it appears that he has a good arguable case. Mr Smith knows that Mr Jones has no assets within the jurisdiction but is aware of the fact that the latter has significant sums lodged in bank accounts in the UK. Before the trial takes place, Mr Smith is tipped off by a reliable source that Mr Jones intends to remove these monies from the accounts with a view to evading his obligations to Mr Smith and retiring to a small South American country. Mr Smith has also instituted proceedings against Smallcorp for breach of copyright. Mr Smith obtained an Anton Piller order against Smallcorp but failed to disclose all material facts in making his application. The order was executed at Smallcorp's business premises outside working hours and the management of Smallcorp has no idea what items were removed from the premises. Advise Mr Smith about his chances of obtaining a pre-trial Mareva injunction on a world-wide basis against Mr Jones. In addition, advise Mr Smith as to what action Smallcorp might take against him in relation to the execution of the Anton Piller order