Lonmar Global Risks Ltd v West & Ors [2010] EWHC 2878 (QB) (11 November 2010)

Lonmar Global Risks Ltd v West & Ors [2010] EWHC 2878 (QB) (11 November 2010)

The court held that the restrictive covenants were reasonable and enforceable, and that the individual defendants breached their contractual and fiduciary duties by soliciting clients and employees and diverting business to Tyser. Tyser was found to have induced breaches of contract. However, the court found that the claimant failed to prove that the admitted or found breaches caused the claimed loss, and thus the claim for damages failed.

Citation
[2010] EWHC 2878 (QB)
Parties
Claimant: Lonmar Global Risks Limited (formerly SBJ Global Risks Limited); First Defendant: Barrie West; Second Defendant: Laurence Niel Mee; Third Defendant: Stephen Karpus; Fourth Defendant: Tyser & Co Limited
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
11 November 2010
Procedural Posture
High Court Civil Claim (queen's Bench Division) / Judgment After Trial
Outcome
Claim dismissed on quantum; restrictive covenants upheld; breaches found but no recoverable loss proven.
Legal Topics
Restrictive Covenants, Breach of Contract, Fiduciary Duties, Confidential Information, Non Solicitation, Conspiracy, Inducement of Breach of Contract
Employment Law Contract Law Commercial Law Restrictive Covenants Breach of Contract Fiduciary Duties Confidential Information Non Solicitation +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 3 Authorities cited 3 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 4
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Lonmar Global Risks Limited (formerly SBJ Global Risks Limited)

Claimant

Barrie West

First Defendant

Laurence Niel Mee

Second Defendant

Stephen Karpus

Third Defendant

Tyser & Co Limited

Fourth Defendant

Procedural Posture

High Court Civil Claim (queen's Bench Division) / Judgment After Trial

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the individual defendants breached their employment contracts and fiduciary duties by soliciting clients and employees and diverting business to Tyser & Co Limited.
  2. 2 Whether the restrictive covenants in the employment contracts were enforceable.
  3. 3 Whether Tyser & Co Limited induced breaches of contract and conspired with the individual defendants.

Ratio Decidendi

The court held that the restrictive covenants were reasonable and enforceable, and that the individual defendants breached their contractual and fiduciary duties by soliciting clients and employees and diverting business to Tyser. Tyser was found to have induced breaches of contract. However, the court found that the claimant failed to prove that the admitted or found breaches caused the claimed loss, and thus the claim for damages failed.

Court Disposition

Claim dismissed on quantum; restrictive covenants upheld; breaches found but no recoverable loss proven.

Orders

  • No damages awarded to claimant.
  • Restrictive covenants declared reasonable and enforceable.