Grant, Victoria, Linsford Hamilton and Cyril Anderson et al v Noranda Jamaica Bauxite Partners, Noranda Jamaica Bauxite Partners 11 et al

Injunction – Application for the grant of an injunction – Threshold test – Whether there is a serious issue to be tried – Balance of convenience – Whether the balance of convenience lies in favour of the grant of injunctive relief – Irreparable harm – Whether the applicants would suffer irreparable harm should the application for the grant of an injunction be refused – Whether the respondents would suffer irreparable harm should the application for the grant of an injunction be allowed – Application for the grant of an injunction made against the background of a constitutional claim challenging the lawfulness of bauxite mining activities on the part of the defendants – Breach of fundamental rights – Right to life – Right to receive information – Right to reside in any part of Jamaica – Right to enjoy a healthy and productive environment free from the threat of injury or damage from environmental abuse and degradation of the ecological heritage – Right to protection from degrading treatment Damages – Whether damages are an adequate remedy
Undertaking as to damages – Waiver of requirement for undertaking as to damages – Whether the application for an injunction should properly be granted in circumstances where the applicants are unable to give an undertaking as to damages Remedies – Whether grant of injunctive relief – Whether award of damages – The Judicature (Supreme Court) Act, section 49(h), Civil Procedure Rules, 2002, rules 17.1(1)(a) and 17.4