The law in the U.S. allowed a claim to be filed for both compensatory and punitive damages. The law in England only allowed the claim for compensatory damages, and those would be substantially less under English law. D’s reaction to the possibility of suit in the U.S. was quite vigorous. D moved to set aside and stay the U.S. proceedings. D also moved to expedite the English proceedings. They delivered a defense to the English action on April 30 and on May 1st issued two summonses, one for directions and the other for an injunction to restrain P from prosecuting and continuing the U.S. proceedings. The judge in chambers was given two motions one to strike out the notice of discontinuance as filed by P and the other for an injunction. The judge held the notice of discontinuance was in the circumstances an abuse of the process of the court and struck it out. Then he granted the injunction requested. P appealed. That court restored P’s notice of discontinuance of his action in England and then discharged the injunction, which the judge had granted thus allowing P to proceed with his action in the U.S. D appealed.

This section contains the nature of the case and procedural background.

The legal issues presented in this case will be displayed here.

The court's holding and decision will be displayed here.

Legal analysis from Dean's Law Dictionary will be displayed here.