Half a century ago, it was accepted that the court’s power to grant injunctions was limited to situations where the applicant had an independent underlying substantive right against the respondent. This notion is now generally considered outmoded, in view of the incremental development of novel forms of injunctions, many of which are “freestanding” in the sense of not requiring an independent underlying substantive right or cause of action. This article defends the modern position and argues that the rejection of “freestanding” injunctions in Gazelle Ventures v Lim Yong Sim [2024] 4 SLR 1066 represents a backward step that should not be followed.