Manufacturing Excellence Ltd v Hemming (t/a Hemming-Mann Ltd) & Ors [2013] EWHC 2825 (QB) (18 September 2013)

Manufacturing Excellence Ltd v Hemming (t/a Hemming-Mann Ltd) & Ors [2013] EWHC 2825 (QB) (18 September 2013)

The 2007 consultancy contract was between the claimant and Steve Hemming's company (HMIM), not Hemming personally, despite the misnomer 'Hemming-Mann Ltd.' The contracts with the defendants (except Birkhead) expired on 31 March 2008, but the parties' conduct evidenced an implied waiver of the formal renewal requirement, so the contractual terms (including restraint clauses) continued to apply post-expiry. The restraint of trade clauses were enforceable against Hill and Birkhead. The claimant's claims against Hemming personally failed as he was not a party to the contract. The court found breaches of contract and enforceable restraints against Hill and Birkhead, but not against Hemming...

Citation
[2013] EWHC 2825 (QB)
Parties
Claimant: Manufacturing Excellence Limited; First Defendant: Steve Hemming trading as Hemming-Mann Limited; Second Defendant: Graham Hill trading as Graham Hill Training; Third Defendant: Alastair Birkhead; Fourth Defendant: Parallax Partners Limited
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
18 September 2013
Procedural Posture
Commercial/contract Dispute / High Court Trial Judgment
Outcome
Claim partly succeeded; judgment for claimant against Hill and Birkhead (and their companies) for breach of contract and enforceable restraints; claim against Hemming personally dismissed; quantum of damages to be determined by experts.
Legal Topics
Consultancy Agreements, Restraint of Trade, Breach of Contract, Breach of Confidence, Economic Torts, Constructive Trust, Inducement of Breach of Contract
Contract Law Company Law Employment Law Tort Law Consultancy Agreements Restraint of Trade Breach of Contract Breach of Confidence +3 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 5 Authorities cited 9 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Manufacturing Excellence Limited

Claimant

Steve Hemming trading as Hemming-Mann Limited

First Defendant

Graham Hill trading as Graham Hill Training

Second Defendant

Alastair Birkhead

Third Defendant

Parallax Partners Limited

Fourth Defendant

Procedural Posture

Commercial/contract Dispute / High Court Trial Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether Steve Hemming was personally a party to the 2007 consultancy contract or whether the contract was with his company (HMIM)
  2. 2 Whether the consultancy contracts with the defendants continued after their stated expiry dates or became ad hoc arrangements
  3. 3 Whether the restraint of trade clauses in the contracts were enforceable

Ratio Decidendi

The 2007 consultancy contract was between the claimant and Steve Hemming's company (HMIM), not Hemming personally, despite the misnomer 'Hemming-Mann Ltd.' The contracts with the defendants (except Birkhead) expired on 31 March 2008, but the parties' conduct evidenced an implied waiver of the formal renewal requirement, so the contractual terms (including restraint clauses) continued to apply post-expiry. The restraint of trade clauses were enforceable against Hill and Birkhead. The claimant's claims against Hemming personally failed as he was not a party to the contract. The court found breaches of contract and enforceable restraints against Hill and Birkhead, but not against Hemming...

Court Disposition

Claim partly succeeded; judgment for claimant against Hill and Birkhead (and their companies) for breach of contract and enforceable restraints; claim against Hemming personally dismissed; quantum of damages to be determined by experts.

Orders

  • Damages to be assessed by forensic accountants in accordance with the court's findings.
  • Claim against Steve Hemming personally dismissed.