WELFORD QUARCOO vs. THE ATTORNEY-GENERAL AND THE ELECTORAL COMMISSION

DR. DATE-BAH JSC: After a careful reading of the plaintiff’s motion paper and supporting affidavit and a consideration of his counsel’s oral submissions as well as the affidavit in opposition for the 1st defendant and the oral submissions of counsel for the first and second defendants, I have made the decision that I am about to explain. It has always been my understanding that the requirements for the grant of an interlocutory injunction are: first, that the applicant must establish that there is a serious question to be tried; secondly, that he or she would suffer irreparable damage which cannot be remedied by the award of damages, unless the interlocutory injunction is granted; and finally that the balance of convenience is in favour of granting him or her the interlocutory injunction. The balance of convenience, of course, means weighing up the disadvantages of granting the relief against the disadvantages of not granting the relief. Where the relief sought relates, as her...