Le Puy Ltd v Potter & Anor [2015] EWHC 193 (QB) (02 February 2015)

Le Puy Ltd v Potter & Anor [2015] EWHC 193 (QB) (02 February 2015)

There is a serious question to be tried regarding Mr Potter's binding to the Alleged Contract and the enforceability of the restrictive covenants and confidential information provisions. Damages would not be an adequate remedy for Harpur. The balance of convenience favours granting an interim injunction to preserve Harpur's customer relationships pending a speedy trial.

Citation
[2015] EWHC 193 (QB)
Parties
Claimant: Le Puy Limited; First Defendant: Christopher Alan Potter; Second Defendant: Abstract Recruitment Limited
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
02 February 2015
Procedural Posture
Interim Injunction Application / Post Resignation, Pre Trial
Outcome
Interim injunction granted
Legal Topics
Restrictive Covenants, Confidential Information, Restraint of Trade, Interim Injunctions
Employment Law Contract Law Restrictive Covenants Confidential Information Restraint of Trade Interim 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 17 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Le Puy Limited

Claimant

Christopher Alan Potter

First Defendant

Abstract Recruitment Limited

Second Defendant

Procedural Posture

Interim Injunction Application / Post Resignation, Pre Trial

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether Mr Potter is bound by the Alleged Contract
  2. 2 Enforceability of restrictive covenants
  3. 3 Enforceability of confidential information provisions

Ratio Decidendi

There is a serious question to be tried regarding Mr Potter's binding to the Alleged Contract and the enforceability of the restrictive covenants and confidential information provisions. Damages would not be an adequate remedy for Harpur. The balance of convenience favours granting an interim injunction to preserve Harpur's customer relationships pending a speedy trial.

Court Disposition

Interim injunction granted

Orders

  • Mr Potter restrained from canvassing, soliciting, or dealing with Harpur's customers as defined in the Alleged Contract clauses 16.5.1 and 16.5.2
  • Mr Potter restrained from using or disclosing Harpur's confidential information as defined in clause 18