restraining Mr. McNab from threatening, harassing or
intimidating the applicant.
The problem with the relief claimed in paragraph 1
is that there is not one shred of evidence on the founding
papers that Mr Mcnab is in possession of an y of the
documents I am asked to direct that he returns . Nor is there
any factual or legal basis laid for the proposition that he is
under an obligation to do so. He may have the documents.
He may be under an obligation to return them. The problem
is th at the deponent to the founding affidavit does not say
so. For that reason, I cannot grant any of the relief in
paragraph 1.
Paragraph 2, insofar as it seeks to restrain Mr
Mcnab’s associational or expressive conduct, is not
competent at law. A case m ust be made out that a prior
restraint on expressive or associational conduct is
necessary on the facts before me , and that a damages claim
brought in due course will not be sufficient to vindicate the
applicant’s rights . No such case is made out in the
founding affidavit, and so a prior restraint cannot be
granted .
Paragraph 2.6 cannot be granted beca use the
underlying conduct said to constitute threatening,
intimidating, harassing, or victimising behaviour is not
specified in the founding affidavit.