Dare International Ltd v Soliman & Anor [2025] EWHC 227 (KB) (05 February 2025)

Dare International Ltd v Soliman & Anor [2025] EWHC 227 (KB) (05 February 2025)

The Court found that certain confidential information was protectable and that the post-termination restraints, as drafted and applied, were reasonable and enforceable to the extent necessary to protect Dare's legitimate business interests. The Defendants did not misuse confidential information or breach fiduciary duties in the manner alleged, but there were breaches of contract regarding deletion of evidence and misleading correspondence. Springboard relief was not justified on the facts. The claim for unjust enrichment failed as the Defendants' sick leave was medically certified and not fraudulent.

Citation
[2025] EWHC 227 (KB)
Parties
Claimant: Dare International Ltd; First Defendant: Stephen Soliman; Second Defendant: Ashley Hikmet
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
05 February 2025
Procedural Posture
High Court Civil Claim (employment) / Final Judgment on Liability and Injunctive Relief; Quantum Reserved for Later Hearing
Outcome
Post-termination restraints enforced by final injunction; springboard relief refused; liability for certain breaches of contract found; no finding of unjust enrichment; quantum to be determined at later hearing.
Legal Topics
Post Termination Restraints, Non Compete Covenants, Springboard Relief, Breach of Contract, Fiduciary Duties, Confidential Information, Unjust Enrichment
Employment Law Contract Law Equity and Trusts Post Termination Restraints Non Compete Covenants Springboard Relief Breach of Contract Fiduciary Duties +2 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 4 Authorities cited 7 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Dare International Ltd

Claimant

Stephen Soliman

First Defendant

Ashley Hikmet

Second Defendant

Procedural Posture

High Court Civil Claim (employment) / Final Judgment on Liability and Injunctive Relief; Quantum Reserved for Later Hearing

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Are the post-termination restraints in the Defendants' contracts enforceable?
  2. 2 Is the Claimant entitled to final injunctive relief to enforce those restraints?
  3. 3 Is the Claimant entitled to springboard relief?

Ratio Decidendi

The Court found that certain confidential information was protectable and that the post-termination restraints, as drafted and applied, were reasonable and enforceable to the extent necessary to protect Dare's legitimate business interests. The Defendants did not misuse confidential information or breach fiduciary duties in the manner alleged, but there were breaches of contract regarding deletion of evidence and misleading correspondence. Springboard relief was not justified on the facts. The claim for unjust enrichment failed as the Defendants' sick leave was medically certified and not fraudulent.

Court Disposition

Post-termination restraints enforced by final injunction; springboard relief refused; liability for certain breaches of contract found; no finding of unjust enrichment; quantum to be determined at later hearing.

Orders

  • Final injunction granted enforcing post-termination restraints for 12 months from termination date, subject to any reduction for garden leave.
  • Springboard relief refused.