In this case, the plaintiff sued the operator of a petrol station neighbouring a residential lot. The plaintiff complained that the exposure to the gasoline fumes and petrol smoke had consequences on his health. Also, the plaintiff pointed out that the station was releasing black oil.
Following the investigation elements provided by the parties, the Court considered that the accusations of the plaintiff were not founded and because the plaintiff could not show the evidence of those facts. The court explained that the request of the plaintiff would impose a burden of proof upon a defendant. The Court recalled the principle which states that the burden of the proof relies on the plaintiff and that in the absence of conclusive evidences, the injunction damages could not be granted.