Prophet Plc v Huggett [2014] EWCA Civ 1013 (22 July 2014)

Prophet Plc v Huggett [2014] EWCA Civ 1013 (22 July 2014)

The restrictive covenant, as drafted, unambiguously referred only to products with which the appellant was actually involved (Pr2 and Pr3), and since no competitor provides these, the covenant is effectively toothless. The court cannot rewrite or expand the covenant to give it commercial effect; the employer must live with the bargain as made.

Citation
[2014] EWCA Civ 1013
Parties
Claimant/respondent: Prophet PLC; Defendant/appellant: Christopher Huggett
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
22 July 2014
Procedural Posture
Appeal (civil) / Court of Appeal Judgment on Appeal From High Court
Outcome
Appeal allowed
Legal Topics
Restrictive Covenants, Interpretation of Contracts, Injunctions, Restraint of Trade
Employment Law Contract Law Restrictive Covenants Interpretation of Contracts Injunctions Restraint of Trade

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 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Prophet PLC

Claimant/respondent

Christopher Huggett

Defendant/appellant

Procedural Posture

Appeal (civil) / Court of Appeal Judgment on Appeal From High Court

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Proper interpretation of restrictive covenant in employment contract
  2. 2 Whether the restrictive covenant was enforceable or void as an unreasonable restraint of trade
  3. 3 Whether the High Court judge was correct to modify the covenant's language to give it commercial effect

Ratio Decidendi

The restrictive covenant, as drafted, unambiguously referred only to products with which the appellant was actually involved (Pr2 and Pr3), and since no competitor provides these, the covenant is effectively toothless. The court cannot rewrite or expand the covenant to give it commercial effect; the employer must live with the bargain as made.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed

Orders

  • Paragraph 1 of the High Court order set aside
  • Injunction against the appellant discharged