Analysing the measure likelihood of success on the merits - Assignment Example

In addition, the applicant’s attorney should prove to the court that effort has been made to stop to notify the adverse party and should give the reasons to maintain the claim that no court notice is required or the adverse party. The case of Ben Njoroge Muchunu & 2 others v Phares Muchunu & 2 others [2013] eKLR. In case, the applicants sought an order of temporary restraint to prohibit the plaintiff and the defendant against issuing the share of $52,000 as the proceeds from the sale of an estate to the late Benjamin Njoroge Wamanja.

The applicants claimed that the money way held in the banks account in the names of the defendants’ and the plaintiffs’ affidavit. The basis of success was the fact that the applicants did not face any objection in their claim since there was no affidavit to deny the applicants claim. Therefore, in cases of denial of the issuance of a court injunction the applicants were entitled to suffer permanent damages that neither the defendant nor the plaintiff would compensate the applicant (Henry 47).

The other alternative available is for the plaintiff and the defendant to establish to the court how they would compensate the applicants. In NEW YORK TIMES V. SULLIVAN, 376 U.S. 254, 84 S. Ct. 710, 11 L. Ed. 2d 686 [1964]. The New York times made a detailed advertisement titled “Heed their rising Voices” in a bid to raise funds to protect martin Luther King Jr against an Albama denunciation of false swearing. The Alabama court denied the application of temporary restraining order of defamation of Montogery Safety commissioner, L.B. Sullivan who was the police supervisor.

The court claimed that the advertisement made by the New York Times did not mention Sullivan hence the commissioner had no base to sue the press for defamation. Also, these facts are evident in American Chicle Co. v. Topps Chewing Gum, Inc., 208 F.2d 560, 563 (2d Cir. 1953) (L. Hand, J.). The failure of the plaintiff was as a result of lack of evidence of defamation hence the press could not be restrained from exercising their freedom of speech. In the case of Data General Corp. v. Digital Computer Controls, Inc 1971.

The data general corporation exposed design information through its Nova 1200 minicomputer informing the owners of its secrecy of the design drawings in a contract agreement. Digital computer controls designed its minicomputer that resembled that of digital General Corporation that had sued in court to restrain digital computer controls against the use of heir technology illegally. The court help that a digital computer controls had breached the secrecy rights of the digital general corporation (Patterson 334).

The bases for success of the digital general corporation case against digital computer controls were the fact that digital general corporation had applied sufficient security for their drawings hence digital computer controls breached the contractual terms by using confidential information for personal gain. In Carlill v. Carbolic Smoke Ball Co. [1893] Q.B. 256 (C.A.). the carbolic smoke ball company placed a newspaper advertisement promising 100 pounds to any person who consumed smoke balls three times in a day as directed by the company.

Carlill consumed the smoke balls as directed and contracted influenza. She claimed the reward from the company, but the company denounced any contractual obligation with Carlill. The court applied temporary