TRW & Co’s UK branch is based at Holborn Gate, 330 High Holborn, London, WC1V 7QH, England.

This note summarises the nature of interim injunctive relief as it is framed in Bangladesh, highlights key principles that typically govern applications for temporary relief, and flags comparative and practical considerations for international parties. It is intended as an informational guide for sophisticated users assessing the viability and practicalities of seeking or responding to interim orders in Bangladesh.

Overview: purpose and character of temporary injunctions

Temporary injunctions in Bangladesh operate as equitable, interim measures designed to preserve the status quo and prevent irreparable harm pending trial or final disposal of a suit. Courts use such powers to restrain parties from committing acts that would render judicial relief ineffective — for example, disposal of disputed property, dissipation of assets, or continued breach of rights that cannot be adequately remedied by damages.

Key legal principles and typical thresholds

Although procedural detail varies, practitioners can expect applications for interim relief to be assessed against familiar equitable criteria:

• likelihood of the claim (prima facie case) — whether the applicant has an arguable legal basis;
• risk of irreparable harm — harm that cannot be compensated by a later award of damages;
• balance of convenience — comparative prejudice to the parties if relief is granted or refused;
• adequacy of alternative remedies — whether existing remedies at law would suffice.

Courts may also require security for damages, undertakings as to damages, or other protective conditions when exercising discretionary injunctive powers.

Comparative and enforcement considerations for international parties

For overseas litigants or commercial counterparties, several practical issues commonly arise. First, forum and enforcement: an injunction granted in Bangladesh will only bind the respondent within its jurisdiction; foreign enforcement requires separate proceedings and may depend on reciprocal recognition. Second, timing and evidence: interim relief is inherently time-sensitive and typically requires a focused factual record and sworn affidavit evidence. Third, interlocutory appeal and variation: regimes for challenging interim orders differ between jurisdictions and can affect strategy.

Where English or other foreign proceedings are concurrent, practitioners often consider parallel strategies — for example, letters of request, preservation orders, or seeking ancillary relief in more than one jurisdiction — but these involve complex cross-border litigation and enforcement questions.

Practical checklist for litigants

1. Clarify remedy sought: injunctive restraint, asset preservation, or other interim relief.
2. Assemble succinct, sworn evidence demonstrating urgency and irreparable harm.
3. Identify the respondent’s relevant assets and likely avenues for enforcement.
4. Consider undertaking to pay damages and the prospect of providing security.
5. Assess choice of forum and any parallel proceedings; plan for cross-border enforcement.
6. Engage local counsel early to navigate procedural practice and court timetables.
7. Prepare for possible interlocutory challenges and compliance risk management.

Jurisdiction and sources

Primary sources and institutions to consult include:

• Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (Order 39 provisions relating to interim injunctions) as applied in Bangladesh
• Decisions and practice guidance of the Supreme Court of Bangladesh
• Official Gazette publications and the Supreme Court of Bangladesh website for procedural rules
• For comparative purposes: Civil Procedure Rules and case law of England and Wales (where cross-border strategy is considered)

General information only; not legal advice and not a substitute for advice on a particular matter.