Pirtek (UK) Ltd v Joinplace Ltd (t/a Pirtek Darlington) & Ors

Pirtek (UK) Ltd v Joinplace Ltd (t/a Pirtek Darlington) & Ors

The restrictive covenant was valid under both the Competition Act 1998 and common law as it was necessary to protect Pirtek (UK)'s know-how and goodwill. Mr Vickers breached the RC by engaging in Vetech's business, which competed with Pirtek (UK). Vetech, through Ms Garratt, induced the breach and was liable. The injunction was properly granted; no loss was recoverable under the cross-undertaking, and the malicious prosecution claim was unfounded.

Parties
Claimant: Pirtek (UK) Limited; 1st Defendant: Joinplace Limited (T/A Pirtek Darlington); 2nd Defendant: Ian Vickers; 3rd Defendant: Lynn Garratt; 4th Defendant: Vetech Limited
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
07 July 2010
Procedural Posture
Civil (franchise/contract/competition) / Judgment After Trial
Outcome
All active claims by Pirtek (UK) dismissed as moot; cross-claim by Ms Garratt and Vetech dismissed.
Legal Topics
Restrictive Covenants, Franchise Agreements, Inducement of Breach of Contract, Conspiracy to Injure, Malicious Prosecution, Cross Undertaking in Damages
Contract Law Competition Law Tort Law Restrictive Covenants Franchise Agreements Inducement of Breach of Contract Conspiracy to Injure Malicious Prosecution +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 3 Authorities cited 12 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 5
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Pirtek (UK) Limited

Claimant

Joinplace Limited (T/A Pirtek Darlington)

1st Defendant

Ian Vickers

2nd Defendant

Lynn Garratt

3rd Defendant

Vetech Limited

4th Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil (franchise/contract/competition) / Judgment After Trial

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Validity of post-termination restrictive covenant (RC) under Competition Act 1998 and common law
  2. 2 Whether Mr Vickers breached the RC
  3. 3 Whether Vetech induced breach or conspired with Mr Vickers

Ratio Decidendi

The restrictive covenant was valid under both the Competition Act 1998 and common law as it was necessary to protect Pirtek (UK)'s know-how and goodwill. Mr Vickers breached the RC by engaging in Vetech's business, which competed with Pirtek (UK). Vetech, through Ms Garratt, induced the breach and was liable. The injunction was properly granted; no loss was recoverable under the cross-undertaking, and the malicious prosecution claim was unfounded.

Court Disposition

All active claims by Pirtek (UK) dismissed as moot; cross-claim by Ms Garratt and Vetech dismissed.

Orders

  • No relief granted to Pirtek (UK) Limited.
  • Cross-claim for compensation by Ms Garratt and Vetech dismissed.