Caretower Ltd v Posner [2018] EWHC 2455 (QB) (31 August 2018)

Caretower Ltd v Posner [2018] EWHC 2455 (QB) (31 August 2018)

There is a high degree of assurance that Caretower will establish at trial that the information in question is confidential and that Mr Posner is bound by the contractual provisions. The balance of convenience strongly favours granting an injunction, as damages would not be an adequate remedy and the risk to Caretower's business is significant. The order is limited to require Mr Posner to comply with the contractual confidentiality and non-compete provisions, deliver up confidential information, and certify compliance.

Citation
[2018] EWHC 2455 (QB)
Parties
Claimant: Caretower Limited; First Defendant: Jonathan Posner; Second Defendant: Epaton Limited; Third Defendant: NG Security (UK) Limited
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
31 August 2018
Procedural Posture
Interim Injunction Application / Interlocutory
Outcome
Interim injunction granted against the first defendant (Mr Posner), with modifications to the draft order. No ruling necessary against the second and third defendants due to undertakings.
Legal Topics
Interim Injunctions, Restrictive Covenants, Confidential Information, Restraint of Trade, Employment Contracts
Employment Law Contract Law Confidentiality Interim Injunctions Restrictive Covenants Confidential Information Restraint of Trade Employment Contracts

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 2 Authorities cited 4 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Caretower Limited

Claimant

Jonathan Posner

First Defendant

Epaton Limited

Second Defendant

NG Security (UK) Limited

Third Defendant

Procedural Posture

Interim Injunction Application / Interlocutory

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the claimant is entitled to an interim injunction restraining the first defendant from breaching contractual confidentiality and non-compete provisions
  2. 2 Whether the contractual provisions are enforceable or amount to an unlawful restraint of trade
  3. 3 Whether damages would be an adequate remedy

Ratio Decidendi

There is a high degree of assurance that Caretower will establish at trial that the information in question is confidential and that Mr Posner is bound by the contractual provisions. The balance of convenience strongly favours granting an injunction, as damages would not be an adequate remedy and the risk to Caretower's business is significant. The order is limited to require Mr Posner to comply with the contractual confidentiality and non-compete provisions, deliver up confidential information, and certify compliance.

Court Disposition

Interim injunction granted against the first defendant (Mr Posner), with modifications to the draft order. No ruling necessary against the second and third defendants due to undertakings.

Orders

  • Mr Posner to comply with contractual confidentiality and non-compete provisions (clauses 12 and 18.2.1-18.2.6)
  • Mr Posner to deliver up Caretower's confidential information