The party seeking an injunction has the burden of proving the necessity therefor. Board of Education of Peoria School District No. 150 v. Peoria Education Ass'n, 29 Ill. App.3d 411, 413 (1975). The plaintiffs in this case have not met that burden.

The party seeking the injunction has the burden of proving the necessity therefor. Board of Education of City of Peoria School District No. 150 v. Peoria Education Association (1975), 29 Ill. App.3d 411, 330 N.E.2d 235. • 2 The decision of whether to grant the preliminary injunction rests within the sound discretion of the trial court, with appellate review restricted to determining whether the trial judge correctly exercised his broad discretionary powers.

In evaluating these factors we also note that the trial court has broad discretion to issue an injunction and its determination to do so will not be set aside absent a manifest abuse of that discretion. Board of Education v. Peoria Education Association (1975), 29 Ill. App.3d 411, 330 N.E.2d 235. • 5 It is undisputed that appellee Houseknecht and all intervenors except appellee Midwest are parties to civil actions arising out of the collapse of the aerial platform on which appellant proposed to perform destructive testing.

Here, the controversy concerns the rights of the parties under the master license agreement, a contract executed in Illinois, according to Illinois law. Certainly the trial court had legitimate authority to issue the injunction and further, is in a better position to resolve the dispute than the French court, which must attempt to interpret Illinois law. • 3 As to the actual issuance of the preliminary injunction, a trial court has broad discretion when issuing an injunction and said injunction will not be set aside unless there is a manifest abuse of discretion. ( Board ofEducation v. Peoria Education Association (1975), 29 Ill. App.3d 411, 330 N.E.2d 235.) We find no abuse of discretion here.

Along similar lines, attention is directed to the following statement found in K.F.K. Corp. v. American Continental Homes, Inc. (1975), 31 Ill. App.3d 1017, 1020, 335 N.E.2d 156, 158: "The issuance of a preliminary injunction is within the sound discretion of the trial court upon a prima facie demonstration of necessity and a court of review will not set aside the injunction order unless there is a manifest abuse of discretion or an error of law. ( Board of Education v. Peoria Education Association, 29 Ill. App.3d 441, 413, 330 N.E.2d 235, 236-37 (1975).)"

" • 1, 2 The issuance of a preliminary injunction is within the sound discretion of the trial court upon a prima facie demonstration of necessity and a court of review will not set aside the injunction order unless there is a manifest abuse of discretion or an error of law. ( Board of Education v. Peoria Education Association, 29 Ill. App.3d 411, 413, 330 N.E.2d 235, 236-37 (1975).) Where as here, the parties are present and a hearing has been had, the mere recitals to the affect that the court was fully advised of the premises or has issued the injunction upon "good cause shown" have been held sufficient to sustain the presumption that the trial court considered the order to be based upon sufficient evidence, especially where no responsive pleadings have been filed.