DXC Eclipse Pty Ltd ACN 051 758 199 v Wildsmith [2022] NSWSC 512

DXC Eclipse Pty Ltd ACN 051 758 199 v Wildsmith [2022] NSWSC 512

An interlocutory injunction should be granted restraining the defendants from competing with the business of Sable 37 (with certain exceptions regarding Will Thirty-Three Pty Ltd investment) and soliciting customers/employees, as there is a serious question to be tried in relation to both the validity and breach of restraint, the balance of convenience favours restraint, and damages would not adequately remedy potential loss.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
04 May 2022
Procedural Posture
Interlocutory Injunction / Interlocutory Hearing
Outcome
Interlocutory injunction granted. Costs reserved.
Legal Topics
['interlocutory Injunction' 'restraint of Trade' 'sale of Business' 'non Compete Clause' 'non Solicitation Clause' 'balance of Convenience']
['equity' 'contract Law' 'restraint of Trade'] ['interlocutory Injunction' 'restraint of Trade' 'sale of Business' 'non Compete Clause' 'non Solicitation Clause' 'balance of Convenience']

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 1 Authorities cited 2 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Procedural Posture

Interlocutory Injunction / Interlocutory Hearing

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether the negative covenant against competition in the April 2018 agreement is a valid restraint of trade.' 'Whether there has been a breach or an anticipated breach of the restraint by involvement in Will Thirty-Three Pty Ltd and Sentient Dynamics Pty Ltd.' 'Whether there is a serious question to be tried regarding the scope and application of the restraint of trade covenants.' 'Whether the balance of convenience warrants granting the interlocutory injunction requested.']

Ratio Decidendi

An interlocutory injunction should be granted restraining the defendants from competing with the business of Sable 37 (with certain exceptions regarding Will Thirty-Three Pty Ltd investment) and soliciting customers/employees, as there is a serious question to be tried in relation to both the validity and breach of restraint, the balance of convenience favours restraint, and damages would not adequately remedy potential loss.

Court Disposition

Interlocutory injunction granted. Costs reserved.

Orders

  • ['First and Second Defendants are restrained from carrying on, being concerned in, or soliciting in any competing business to Sable 37 in Australia, New Zealand, United Arab Emirates, India, Fiji, the Philippines, and United States of America without written consent of the Plaintiff (with the exception that...