Define: Interlocutory Judgement

Interlocutory Judgement
Interlocutory Judgement
Quick Summary of Interlocutory Judgement

A summary of an interlocutory judgement is a decision made by a court during the course of a legal proceeding that is not final and does not fully resolve the case. It is an intermediate ruling that addresses a specific issue or aspect of the case, such as a motion to dismiss or a request for a preliminary injunction. Interlocutory judgements are typically made to facilitate the progress of the case and may be subject to further review or modification as the case continues.

Full Definition Of Interlocutory Judgement

In the British legal system, an interlocutory judgment refers to a provisional or interim decision given by a court during the course of litigation, which does not resolve the main dispute but addresses ancillary or procedural issues. Interlocutory judgements play a crucial role in managing and progressing cases efficiently, ensuring that the ultimate resolution is fair and just. This overview explores the nature, purpose, types, procedures, and implications of interlocutory judgements in British law.

Nature and Purpose of Interlocutory Judgements

Interlocutory judgments serve several essential functions within the judicial process. Their primary purpose is to ensure the smooth administration of justice by resolving issues that arise before the final determination of the case. These judgments can:

  1. Facilitate Case Management: Interlocutory judgments help in organizing and managing the case effectively by addressing procedural matters, thus preventing delays and ensuring that the trial proceeds smoothly.
  2. Preserve the Status Quo: By granting interim relief, interlocutory judgments can maintain the existing state of affairs until the case is finally resolved, thereby preventing potential harm or injustice to any party.
  3. Clarify Issues: They can narrow down the issues in dispute, making the trial more focused and efficient.
  4. Ensure Fairness: These judgements can provide interim remedies that protect the rights and interests of the parties during the litigation process.

Types of Interlocutory Judgements

Interlocutory judgments can be broadly categorised into several types, each serving different functions. Some of the most common types include:

  1. Interim Injunctions: These are orders requiring a party to do or refrain from doing a specific act until the final resolution of the case. They are often used to prevent irreparable harm or to maintain the status quo.
  2. Summary Judgment: This is a judgement entered by the court without a full trial, based on the assertion that the opposing party has no real prospect of success on the claim or defence.
  3. Interim Payments: Orders requiring one party to make a payment to the other party before the final judgment, usually when there is a clear liability.
  4. Discovery Orders: These orders compel a party to disclose documents or information relevant to the case, ensuring that both parties have access to the necessary evidence.
  5. Strike Out Orders: These orders can dismiss all or part of a party’s claim or defence if it is deemed to be without merit, frivolous, or an abuse of process.

Procedural Aspects of Interlocutory Judgements

The procedures for obtaining interlocutory judgements are governed by various rules and principles designed to ensure fairness and efficiency. The key procedural aspects include:

  1. Application Process: Interlocutory judgements are typically sought through an application to the court. The application must be supported by evidence and a detailed explanation of why the interim relief is necessary.
  2. Notice to Opposing Party: Generally, the opposing party must be given notice of the application and an opportunity to respond. In urgent cases, an ex parte application (without notice to the other party) may be made, but the court will usually require the applicant to provide a compelling justification.
  3. Hearing: The court will hold a hearing to consider the application, during which both parties can present their arguments and evidence. The hearing is usually less formal and shorter than a full trial.
  4. Criteria for Granting Relief: The court will consider various factors, such as the balance of convenience, the likelihood of success at trial, the risk of irreparable harm, and whether damages would be an adequate remedy.
  5. Appeal: Interlocutory judgments can often be appealed, although the grounds for appeal and the procedures involved may differ from those applicable to final judgments.

Legal Principles Governing Interlocutory Judgements

Several key legal principles guide the courts in making interlocutory judgements:

  1. Balance of Convenience: The court will weigh the respective hardships that each party would suffer if the relief is granted or denied. The aim is to minimise potential harm while the case is pending.
  2. Prima Facie Case: The applicant must demonstrate a prima facie case, meaning there must be sufficient evidence to support a reasonable likelihood of success at trial.
  3. Irreparable Harm: The applicant must show that without the interim relief, they would suffer harm that could not be adequately compensated by damages.
  4. Adequacy of Damages: If monetary compensation would be sufficient to remedy the harm, the court may be less inclined to grant interim relief.
  5. Public Interest: The court may also consider the broader public interest, particularly in cases involving matters of public importance or where the relief sought could have wider implications.

Examples and Case Law

The application of interlocutory judgments can be illustrated through various case law examples:

  1. American Cyanamid Co v Ethicon Ltd [1975] AC 396: This landmark case set out the principles for granting interim injunctions, emphasizing the need to consider the balance of convenience and the adequacy of damages.
  2. Three Rivers District Council v Governor and Company of the Bank of England [2001] UKHL 16: This case highlighted the use of summary judgment, illustrating how courts assess whether a claim has no real prospect of success.
  3. Re Unisoft Group Ltd (No 2) [1993] BCC 420: This case demonstrated the court’s approach to interim payments, particularly in situations where liability is clear but the quantum of damages is disputed.

Implications of Interlocutory Judgements

Interlocutory judgments have significant implications for the parties involved and the judicial system as a whole:

  1. Impact on Litigation Strategy: Interlocutory judgments can influence the strategy and conduct of litigation. For example, an interim injunction can put significant pressure on the defendant, while a summary judgment can effectively end the litigation early.
  2. Costs and Resources: These judgments can affect the costs and resources required for litigation. While they can streamline the process and reduce costs by resolving issues early, they can also add complexity and expense if multiple applications are made.
  3. Judicial Efficiency: By resolving procedural and ancillary issues promptly, interlocutory judgments can enhance the efficiency of the judicial system, reducing the burden on courts and expediting the resolution of cases.
  4. Fairness and Justice: The availability of interlocutory judgments ensures that parties can obtain necessary interim relief, promoting fairness and preventing injustice during the litigation process.

Challenges and Criticisms

Despite their benefits, interlocutory judgments also present certain challenges and criticisms:

  1. Risk of Abuse: There is a risk that parties may misuse interlocutory applications to delay proceedings, harass the opposing party, or gain a tactical advantage.
  2. Resource Intensive: The process of applying for and contesting interlocutory judgments can be resource-intensive, potentially increasing the overall cost and duration of litigation.
  3. Judicial Discretion: The broad discretion afforded to judges in making interlocutory judgments can lead to inconsistency and unpredictability in decisions.
  4. Limited Appeal Rights: The scope for appealing interlocutory judgments is often limited, which can be frustrating for parties who believe the interim decision is unjust.


Interlocutory judgements are a vital component of the British legal system, providing essential interim relief and facilitating the efficient management of cases. They address a wide range of procedural and ancillary issues, helping to preserve the status quo, clarify disputed matters, and ensure that justice is served fairly and promptly. While they offer significant benefits, they also pose certain challenges and criticisms that must be carefully managed. Overall, interlocutory judgments play a crucial role in promoting the smooth and effective administration of justice in British courts.

Interlocutory Judgement FAQ'S

An interlocutory judgement is a ruling or decision made by a court during the course of a legal proceeding that is not final and does not fully resolve the case. It is usually issued to address specific issues or matters that arise before the final judgement is rendered.

Interlocutory judgements can address various issues, such as granting or denying temporary injunctions, determining jurisdictional matters, deciding on discovery disputes, ruling on motions to dismiss or for summary judgement, or resolving issues related to evidence or procedural matters.

In general, interlocutory judgements are not immediately appealable because they are not final judgements. However, there may be specific circumstances or legal provisions that allow for an interlocutory judgement to be appealed, such as when it involves a substantial right or when authorised by statute.

An interlocutory judgement is provisional and does not bring the case to a complete resolution, while a final judgement is the ultimate decision that concludes the case. Final judgements typically determine the rights and obligations of the parties involved and can be appealed.

Yes, an interlocutory judgement can be modified or revoked by the court that issued it. This can occur if new evidence or circumstances arise that warrant a change in the previous ruling or if the court determines that the initial judgement was incorrect or inappropriate.

The timeframe for issuing an interlocutory judgement can vary depending on the complexity of the case, the court’s schedule, and other factors. It can range from a few weeks to several months, or even longer in some cases.

Generally, interlocutory judgements are not enforceable on their own. However, they may have certain immediate effects or consequences, such as granting or denying temporary relief, imposing restrictions, or shaping the course of the ongoing legal proceedings.

As mentioned earlier, interlocutory judgements are typically not immediately appealable. However, parties may seek review or relief from an interlocutory judgement through other means, such as filing a motion for reconsideration or seeking a writ of mandamus.

Interlocutory judgements can be used as persuasive authority or as evidence of the court’s previous rulings in subsequent legal proceedings. However, their weight and relevance may vary depending on the specific circumstances and the nature of the subsequent case.

Interlocutory judgements can be requested in various types of legal cases, including civil, criminal, and administrative proceedings. However, the availability and appropriateness of interlocutory judgements may depend on the specific rules and procedures governing each type of case.

Related Phrases
No related content found.

This site contains general legal information but does not constitute professional legal advice for your particular situation. Persuing this glossary does not create an attorney-client or legal adviser relationship. If you have specific questions, please consult a qualified attorney licensed in your jurisdiction.

This glossary post was last updated: 9th June 2024.

Cite Term

To help you cite our definitions in your bibliography, here is the proper citation layout for the three major formatting styles, with all of the relevant information filled in.

  • Page URL:
  • Modern Language Association (MLA):Interlocutory Judgement. DLS Solicitors. June 12 2024
  • Chicago Manual of Style (CMS):Interlocutory Judgement. DLS Solicitors. (accessed: June 12 2024).
  • American Psychological Association (APA):Interlocutory Judgement. Retrieved June 12 2024, from website:
Avatar of DLS Solicitors
DLS Solicitors : Family Law Solicitors

Our team of professionals are based in Alderley Edge, Cheshire. We offer clear, specialist legal advice in all matters relating to Family Law, Wills, Trusts, Probate, Lasting Power of Attorney and Court of Protection.

All author posts