FD Technologies Plc v Inqdata Ltd [2025] EWHC 1677 (TCC) (27 June 2025)

FD Technologies Plc v Inqdata Ltd [2025] EWHC 1677 (TCC) (27 June 2025)

Given the technical complexity, the need for precise definition of issues, and the likelihood of requiring disclosure and expert evidence, the dispute should proceed under the Part 7 procedure with an exchange of pleadings, rather than the Part 8 procedure relying on a factual matrix table.

Citation
[2025] EWHC 1677 (TCC)
Parties
Claimant (part 7) / Defendant (part 8): FD Technologies plc; Defendant (part 7) / Claimant (part 8): INQDATA Limited
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
27 June 2025
Procedural Posture
Directions Hearing (part 7 and Part 8 Claims) / Interlocutory (determination of Procedural Route)
Outcome
KX's Part 7 claim to proceed; INQ's Part 8 claim to remain stayed.
Legal Topics
Software Licensing, Contractual Interpretation, Injunctions, Declaratory Relief, Case Management
Commercial Law Contract Law Intellectual Property Software Licensing Contractual Interpretation Injunctions Declaratory Relief Case Management

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 8 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

FD Technologies plc

Claimant (part 7) / Defendant (part 8)

INQDATA Limited

Defendant (part 7) / Claimant (part 8)

Procedural Posture

Directions Hearing (part 7 and Part 8 Claims) / Interlocutory (determination of Procedural Route)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the substantive dispute should proceed under Part 7 or Part 8 procedure
  2. 2 Whether INQDATA Limited's use of KX software exceeds the scope of the licence agreement
  3. 3 Whether features of INQDATA's service breach the licence by competing with or replicating KX's software

Ratio Decidendi

Given the technical complexity, the need for precise definition of issues, and the likelihood of requiring disclosure and expert evidence, the dispute should proceed under the Part 7 procedure with an exchange of pleadings, rather than the Part 8 procedure relying on a factual matrix table.

Court Disposition

KX's Part 7 claim to proceed; INQ's Part 8 claim to remain stayed.

Orders

  • Exchange of Part 7-style pleadings to define issues.
  • Strict case management to ensure rapid progress.