One Step (Support) Ltd v Morris -Garner & Anor [2014] EWHC 2213 (QB) (07 July 2014)

One Step (Support) Ltd v Morris -Garner & Anor [2014] EWHC 2213 (QB) (07 July 2014)

The defendants breached both the 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, given her close association with the first defendant and the context of the sale. The Midlands business was not in breach as One Step's plans there were not in an advanced state of preparation at the relevant time.

Citation
[2014] EWHC 2213 (QB)
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; covenants held reasonable and enforceable; quantum of remedy to be determined in subsequent proceedings.
Legal Topics
Restrictive Covenants, Non Compete Clauses, Non Solicitation Clauses, Confidential Information, Restraint of Trade, Employee/shareholder Covenants, Breach of Contract
Contract Law Employment Law Commercial Law Restrictive Covenants Non Compete Clauses Non Solicitation Clauses Confidential Information Restraint of Trade +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 5 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

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. 1 Whether the defendants breached non-compete and non-solicitation covenants
  2. 2 Whether the covenants were reasonable and enforceable, particularly against the second defendant
  3. 3 Whether the defendants misused confidential information

Ratio Decidendi

The defendants breached both the 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, given her close association with the first defendant and the context of the sale. The Midlands business was not in breach as One Step's plans there were not in an advanced state of preparation at the relevant time.

Court Disposition

Defendants found liable for breach of non-compete and non-solicitation covenants; covenants held reasonable and enforceable; quantum of remedy to be determined in subsequent proceedings.

Orders

  • Declaration of liability for breach of restrictive covenants
  • Directions for further proceedings to quantify remedy