Interim injunction in implemented termination disputes will not issue where damages are an adequate remedy and final relief would be pre-empted.

Interim injunction in a service termination dispute is governed by the settled tests of prima facie case, balance of convenience, and irreparable injury. Where the termination order has already been implemented, an interlocutory stay would effectively grant the final relief before trial. The court noted that the claimant's injury in such a dispute is ordinarily compensable in damages and that no exceptional circumstances were shown to justify temporary restraint. On that basis, interim relief was refused and the refusal was upheld.

---

---

Issues: Whether interim injunction could be granted to restrain implementation of the appellant's termination from service pending trial.

Analysis: Grant of interim relief in such matters depends on the established tests of prima facie case, balance of convenience, and irreparable injury. Where the termination order has already been implemented, an interim stay would in substance grant the final relief at the interlocutory stage. In a service dispute of this kind, the injury to the claimant is ordinarily compensable in damages, and the exceptional circumstances justifying interim restraint were not shown.

Conclusion: The appellant was not entitled to interim injunction and the refusal of relief was upheld.

Final Conclusion: Interlocutory relief was declined because the dispute did not satisfy the settled requirements for temporary injunction in a termination matter.

Ratio Decidendi: Interim injunction should not ordinarily be granted in an implemented termination or dismissal dispute where the alleged injury is compensable in damages and the order would effectively amount to final relief.

---