It is well documented that s 1324 is a useful tool for restraining a person from engaging in conduct that contravenes the Corporations Act 2001 (Cth). Without examining the provision, one tends to agree with that statement. In practice, however, the provision does not often provide the outcome that is expected. The author argues that the lack of use of s 1324 is due to the uncertainty and ambiguity in the application of the provision. Unlike with ASIC, the test that a person must satisfy when applying for an injunction is not clear cut. Whether damages could be claimed under s 1324 in place of an injunction is also unclear. The article sets out to argue that some integration with the equitable principles is vital for the survival of s 1324, as injunctions are traditionally a remedy conferred in equity and the Parliament has adopted the concept.