Also known as: balance of equities · balancing the equities · equitable balancing · balance of hardships
Written by attorneys · grounded in primary & secondary sources — see below
A comparative analysis of the hardships that granting an injunction would impose on the defendant and that denying it would impose on the plaintiff. Courts weigh this factor along with others to decide whether injunctive relief is appropriate in tort actions.
Brenda Booth operates a small factory whose emissions slightly discolor the paint on nearby homes owned by Beatrice Brown. Brown proves a continuing trespass but the cost to install emission controls would force Booth to close and lay off twenty workers. The court weighs the modest harm to Brown against the severe economic hardship to Booth and the community and denies the injunction.
Spur Industries ran a cattle feedlot for years before Del E. Webb began building a retirement community nearby. Webb proved the feedlot created a nuisance but the court balanced the hardship of shutting down an established business against the harm to new residents and required Webb to pay Spur's relocation costs before issuing the injunction.
Select any source to read its text and confirm it supports the definition.
Golden State Bottling acquired a bottling plant and continued operations after the prior owner had been ordered to reinstate a discharged union employee. The court balanced the hardship of imposing the reinstatement order on the new owner against the public interest in enforcing labor remedies and held the successor subject to the injunction.
MercExchange proved eBay infringed its patent yet the district court denied a permanent injunction. The Supreme Court required the lower court to balance the hardship of forcing eBay to redesign its platform against the harm to MercExchange from continued infringement and to consider the public interest before deciding whether to grant relief.
The Natural Resources Defense Council sought to enjoin Navy sonar exercises that risked harming marine mammals. The Supreme Court balanced the hardship of restricting essential military training against the environmental harm and held that the balance of equities and public interest weighed against the requested injunction.
A court compares the relative hardship the defendant would suffer if an injunction is granted with the hardship the plaintiff would suffer if the injunction is denied. The analysis also considers the character of the parties' conduct and the interests of third parties and the public.
Supporting sources
No. Even after a tort is proven and damages are shown to be inadequate, the court must still weigh whether an injunction is appropriate by comparing the hardships to each party and other equitable factors.
Supporting sources
No. The need for a jury to resolve disputed facts does not make injunctive relief unavailable. The court may submit factual issues to the jury and then apply the balancing of equities to decide whether an injunction is appropriate.
Supporting sources
When third parties have relied on the defendant's conduct and would suffer substantial losses if an injunction issues, that hardship is weighed against the plaintiff's harm. Courts may condition relief on payment of those losses or deny the injunction when the balance favors the third parties.
Supporting sources
…the official reporter for Arizona Supreme Court decisions. Parallel citation is 494 P.2d 700. [^maj-2]: The court discusses the balancing of equities between an industrial use that predates residential development and the harm to the later-arriving residents, a key holding in nuisance law regarding "coming to the nuisance." Spur…