How have the courts dealt with a motion for an injunction and a contempt order?

In exercising his discretion to deny the appellant’s motion for an injunction and a contempt order, the motion’s judge applied the correct principles of law. It is apparent from the record of the proceedings before him that he considered all the material evidence and he did not consider any irrelevant or immaterial evidence. He found there was no intent on the part of any of the respondents to interfere with the directions contained in his written reasons in Ayangma v. HRC & Eastern School Board 2001 PESCTD 100. At paragraphs 20, 21 and 22 of his reasons he stated: