Article 191 of the Civil Procedure Code identifies several grounds for interim relief, including difficulty enforcing a judgment or exercising a disputed right, irreparable direct injury or injury that an award of damages cannot adequately compensate. A claimant should identify the claim, specific assets and evidence of risk. The extent of a proposed restriction should be proportionate to the claim rather than a blanket freeze supported only by the fact that litigation exists.
Applicable legislation: Civil Procedure Code, Civil Code of Georgia
Applying the rule in practice
For a GEL 30,000 claim, documentary evidence that a specific registered property is being marketed for immediate sale is more useful than speculation. Explain why that transaction threatens eventual enforcement, and address the proportionality of the requested measure.
Demonstrating risk
Explain concretely why enforcement may become difficult or impossible. General suspicion is different from an evidenced risk.
Proportionality
Requested protection should be linked to the claim and avoid disproportionate prejudice. Courts balance competing interests.
Evidence package
Contracts, financial records, asset information and communications can support the application. The measure must fit the specific facts.
How to explain the risk
An assertion that the defendant might transfer assets is often insufficient. Identify the source of risk, current conduct and causal impact on future enforcement. Supporting material may include property records, financial information or documented actions. Distinguish an evidenced risk from mere apprehension.
Selecting a suitable protective measure
A protective measure should relate to the claim and identified threat. Asset attachment in a money claim differs from restraining a continuing act. Measures grossly disproportionate to the protected interest are problematic. Read Article 191 and related provisions in light of the evidence and the opposing party's interests.
Interim relief is not a merits ruling
Interim protection does not determine the final merits, and refusal of protection is not necessarily rejection of the substantive claim. Consider the potential for variation, discharge and review under applicable law. Explain this distinction to clients who might otherwise treat temporary orders as guarantees of success.
Demonstrating practical urgency
Interim relief requires more than an arguable claim: explain the practical risk to future enforcement and support it with objective material, such as evidence of a pending asset transfer. A general suspicion of dissipation is weak. Proportionality matters, and overbroad measures can create separate liability risks. Prepare a short matrix describing the claim, immediate threat, proof, requested measure and less restrictive alternatives. Review the procedural conditions of the current Civil Procedure Code before filing.