One Step (Support) Ltd v Morris -Garner & Anor [2014] EWHC 2213 (QB) (07 July 2014)
The defendants breached enforceable non-compete and non-solicitation covenants by operating Positive Living in material competition with One Step and soliciting significant clients in West London and Thames Valley. The covenants were reasonable and enforceable, including against the second defendant. Positive Living's services overlapped with One Step's, and the distinction based on registration for personal care did not preclude competition. The Midlands business did not breach the covenants as One Step's plans there were not in an advanced state of preparation.
- Citation
- [2014] EWHC 2213
- Parties
- Claimant: One Step (Support) Limited; First Defendant: Karen Morris-Garner; Second Defendant: Andrea Morris-Garner
- Jurisdiction
- England and Wales
- Judgment Date
- 07 July 2014
- Procedural Posture
- Civil Breach of Contract/restrictive Covenants / Judgment on Liability and Entitlement to Remedies, Quantum Reserved
- Outcome
- Defendants found liable for breach of non-compete and non-solicitation covenants; remedies to be determined at a later stage.
- Legal Topics
- Restrictive Covenants, Non Compete Clauses, Non Solicitation Clauses, Confidential Information, Restraint of Trade, Goodwill Protection
Case Brief
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Parties
One Step (Support) Limited
Claimant
Karen Morris-Garner
First Defendant
Andrea Morris-Garner
Second Defendant
Procedural Posture
Civil Breach of Contract/restrictive Covenants / Judgment on Liability and Entitlement to Remedies, Quantum Reserved
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the defendants breached non-compete and non-solicitation covenants
- 2 Whether the covenants were reasonable and enforceable, particularly against the second defendant
- 3 Whether Positive Living was in material competition with One Step
Ratio Decidendi
The defendants breached enforceable non-compete and non-solicitation covenants by operating Positive Living in material competition with One Step and soliciting significant clients in West London and Thames Valley. The covenants were reasonable and enforceable, including against the second defendant. Positive Living's services overlapped with One Step's, and the distinction based on registration for personal care did not preclude competition. The Midlands business did not breach the covenants as One Step's plans there were not in an advanced state of preparation.
Court Disposition
Defendants found liable for breach of non-compete and non-solicitation covenants; remedies to be determined at a later stage.
Orders
- Declaration of liability for breach of restrictive covenants
- Quantum of remedy to be determined in subsequent proceedings
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
Sign in to read
Sign in to read the full judgment text
Sign in to read the full judgment text. Downloads and additional research tools may depend on your plan.
Sign in to read the full judgment