Intercall Conferencing Services Ltd v Steer [2007] EWHC 519 (QB) (15 March 2007)

Intercall Conferencing Services Ltd v Steer [2007] EWHC 519 (QB) (15 March 2007)

The defendant had access to confidential information and trade secrets, and there is a real risk of inadvertent breach of confidentiality if he works for a competitor. The non-competition clause is reasonable in scope, duration, and area, and is necessary to protect the claimant's legitimate business interests. The balance of convenience favours granting the interim injunction.

Citation
[2007] EWHC 519 (QB)
Parties
Claimant/applicant: Intercall Conferencing Services Limited; Defendant/respondent: Andrew Steer
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
15 March 2007
Procedural Posture
Interim Injunction Application / Interlocutory (interim Relief Sought Pending Trial)
Outcome
Interim injunction granted
Legal Topics
Restrictive Covenants, Confidential Information, Interim Injunctions, Non Competition Clauses, Trade Secrets
Employment Law Contract Law Restrictive Covenants Confidential Information Interim Injunctions Non Competition Clauses Trade Secrets

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 6 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Intercall Conferencing Services Limited

Claimant/applicant

Andrew Steer

Defendant/respondent

Procedural Posture

Interim Injunction Application / Interlocutory (interim Relief Sought Pending Trial)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the non-competition clause is enforceable and reasonable in scope and duration
  2. 2 Whether the claimant has a legitimate business interest requiring protection
  3. 3 Whether the defendant is at real risk of breaching confidentiality, even inadvertently

Ratio Decidendi

The defendant had access to confidential information and trade secrets, and there is a real risk of inadvertent breach of confidentiality if he works for a competitor. The non-competition clause is reasonable in scope, duration, and area, and is necessary to protect the claimant's legitimate business interests. The balance of convenience favours granting the interim injunction.

Court Disposition

Interim injunction granted

Orders

  • Defendant restrained from working with named competitors, including Premiere Global Services Inc., until 18 August 2007 or trial or further order
  • Defendant restrained from divulging confidential information or trade secrets of the claimant