Hanover Insurance Brokers Ltd & Anor v Schapiro & Ors [1993] EWCA Civ 2 (20 August 1993)

Hanover Insurance Brokers Ltd & Anor v Schapiro & Ors [1993] EWCA Civ 2 (20 August 1993)

The restrictive covenants in the defendants' service agreements, as clarified to apply only to insurance broking customers and business, are not unreasonably wide or void; the phrase 'endeavour to take away' is sufficiently clear when interpreted as active seeking out of clients. The non-poaching clause is unenforceable due to its excessive scope and lack of justification. Points regarding unknown customers and employees cannot be raised for the first time on appeal without factual basis.

Citation
[1993] EWCA Civ 2
Parties
Plaintiff/appellant: Hanover Insurance Brokers Limited; Plaintiff/appellant: Christchurch Insurance Brokers Limited; Defendant/appellant: Monty Schapiro; Defendant/appellant: Paul Anthony Anscombe; Defendant/appellant: Peter Wilson Rose; Defendant/appellant: David George Knowles
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
20 August 1993
Procedural Posture
Appeal / Interlocutory Appeal From High Court Injunction Order
Outcome
Appeal and cross-appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Restrictive Covenants, Restraint of Trade, Non Solicitation, Non Poaching, Interlocutory Injunctions
Employment Law Contract Law Restrictive Covenants Restraint of Trade Non Solicitation Non Poaching Interlocutory Injunctions

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 5 Authorities cited 10 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Hanover Insurance Brokers Limited

Plaintiff/appellant

Christchurch Insurance Brokers Limited

Plaintiff/appellant

Monty Schapiro

Defendant/appellant

Paul Anthony Anscombe

Defendant/appellant

Peter Wilson Rose

Defendant/appellant

David George Knowles

Defendant/appellant

Procedural Posture

Appeal / Interlocutory Appeal From High Court Injunction Order

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Validity and enforceability of post-employment restrictive covenants
  2. 2 Scope and reasonableness of non-solicitation and non-poaching clauses
  3. 3 Interpretation of 'endeavour to take away' in injunctions

Ratio Decidendi

The restrictive covenants in the defendants' service agreements, as clarified to apply only to insurance broking customers and business, are not unreasonably wide or void; the phrase 'endeavour to take away' is sufficiently clear when interpreted as active seeking out of clients. The non-poaching clause is unenforceable due to its excessive scope and lack of justification. Points regarding unknown customers and employees cannot be raised for the first time on appeal without factual basis.

Court Disposition

Appeal and cross-appeal dismissed

Orders

  • Costs awarded to respondents in each case in any event