Slater & Gordon (UK) 1 Ltd v Watchstone [2019] EWHC 2371 (Comm) (06 September 2019)

Slater & Gordon (UK) 1 Ltd v Watchstone [2019] EWHC 2371 (Comm) (06 September 2019)

The proposed amendments to the defence and the introduction of the counterclaim by Watchstone have a real prospect of success, are more than merely arguable, and should be permitted. The material disclosed supports a prima facie case for breach of confidence, inducing breach of contract, and conspiracy. The objections raised by S&G are matters for trial, not for summary determination at the amendment stage. The amendments are timely and necessary for a fair and just resolution of the issues. The counterclaim should be tried together with the main claim to avoid wasted costs, risk of inconsistent judgments, and to serve the overriding objective of dealing with cases justly.

Citation
[2019] EWHC 2371 (Comm)
Parties
Claimant/respondent: Slater & Gordon (UK) 1 Limited; Defendant/applicant: Watchstone
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
06 September 2019
Procedural Posture
Commercial Court (qbd) Application for Permission to Amend Defence and Bring Counterclaim / Interlocutory Application Prior to Trial
Outcome
Permission granted to Watchstone to amend its defence and to bring a counterclaim. The counterclaim is to be tried together with the main claim.
Legal Topics
Amendment of Pleadings, Breach of Confidence, Inducing Breach of Contract, Unlawful Means Conspiracy, Equitable Set Off, Summary Judgment Principles
Commercial Law Contract Law Equity Amendment of Pleadings Breach of Confidence Inducing Breach of Contract Unlawful Means Conspiracy Equitable Set Off +1 more

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 3 Authorities cited 6 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Slater & Gordon (UK) 1 Limited

Claimant/respondent

Watchstone

Defendant/applicant

Procedural Posture

Commercial Court (qbd) Application for Permission to Amend Defence and Bring Counterclaim / Interlocutory Application Prior to Trial

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether Watchstone should be granted permission to amend its defence and bring a counterclaim for breach of confidence, inducing breach of contract, and unlawful means conspiracy against S&G.
  2. 2 Whether the proposed amendments have a real prospect of success and are more than merely arguable.
  3. 3 Whether the counterclaim should be tried together with the main claim or separately.

Ratio Decidendi

The proposed amendments to the defence and the introduction of the counterclaim by Watchstone have a real prospect of success, are more than merely arguable, and should be permitted. The material disclosed supports a prima facie case for breach of confidence, inducing breach of contract, and conspiracy. The objections raised by S&G are matters for trial, not for summary determination at the amendment stage. The amendments are timely and necessary for a fair and just resolution of the issues. The counterclaim should be tried together with the main claim to avoid wasted costs, risk of inconsistent judgments, and to serve the overriding objective of dealing with cases justly.

Court Disposition

Permission granted to Watchstone to amend its defence and to bring a counterclaim. The counterclaim is to be tried together with the main claim.

Orders

  • Permission to amend defence granted.
  • Permission to bring counterclaim for breach of confidence, inducing breach of contract, and conspiracy granted.