HT-2024-000023 - [2025] EWHC 63 (TCC)

A clear and helpful summary of the issues and the relevant test on this application is set out by O’Farrell J in Camelot UK Lotteries Ltd. v Gambling Commission [2022] EWHC 1664 (TCC) at [48]:

“(i)

Is there a serious issue to be tried

(ii)

If so, would damages be an adequate remedy for the claimant(s) if the suspension were lifted and they succeeded at trial; is it just in all the circumstances that the claimant(s) should be confined to a remedy of damages?

(iii)

If not, would damages be an adequate remedy for the defendant if the suspension remained in place and it succeeded at trial.

(iv)

Where there is doubt as to the adequacy of damages for either of the parties, which course of action is likely to carry the least risk of injustice if it transpires that it was wrong; that is where does the balance of convenience lie?”