Eville & Jones (Group) Ltd & Anor v Aldiss & Ors [2022] EWHC 269 (QB) (11 February 2022)

Eville & Jones (Group) Ltd & Anor v Aldiss & Ors [2022] EWHC 269 (QB) (11 February 2022)

The restrictive covenants in the shareholders' agreement, including the non-competition clause and 18-month duration, are reasonable and enforceable to protect the claimants' legitimate business interests. However, whether Dr Aldiss breached those covenants involves factual disputes unsuitable for summary judgment and must be determined at trial.

Citation
[2022] EWHC 269
Parties
Claimant: Eville & Jones (Group) Limited; Claimant: Eville & Jones (G. B.) Limited; First Defendant: Dr Jason Aldiss; Second Defendant: Javier Garcia Melero; Third Defendant: Luise Castromil Cabo; Fourth Defendant: Vetline Limited
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
11 February 2022
Procedural Posture
Summary Judgment Application / High Court (queen's Bench Division), Summary Judgment Hearing Under CPR Part 24
Outcome
Summary judgment granted in part; application otherwise dismissed.
Legal Topics
Restrictive Covenants, Shareholders' Agreements, Restraint of Trade, Summary Judgment, Confidential Information, Breach of Contract
Contract Law Employment Law Commercial Law Restrictive Covenants Shareholders' Agreements Restraint of Trade Summary Judgment Confidential Information +1 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 22 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Eville & Jones (Group) Limited

Claimant

Eville & Jones (G. B.) Limited

Claimant

Dr Jason Aldiss

First Defendant

Javier Garcia Melero

Second Defendant

Luise Castromil Cabo

Third Defendant

Vetline Limited

Fourth Defendant

Procedural Posture

Summary Judgment Application / High Court (queen's Bench Division), Summary Judgment Hearing Under CPR Part 24

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether restrictive covenants in the shareholders' agreement are reasonable and enforceable
  2. 2 Whether Dr Aldiss breached the restrictive covenants and equitable duty of confidence
  3. 3 Whether summary judgment should be granted on liability for breach of covenants

Ratio Decidendi

The restrictive covenants in the shareholders' agreement, including the non-competition clause and 18-month duration, are reasonable and enforceable to protect the claimants' legitimate business interests. However, whether Dr Aldiss breached those covenants involves factual disputes unsuitable for summary judgment and must be determined at trial.

Court Disposition

Summary judgment granted in part; application otherwise dismissed.

Orders

  • Summary judgment granted in favour of the claimants on the enforceability of the restrictive covenants in the shareholders' agreement.
  • No summary judgment on the issue of breach; that issue to proceed to trial.