Bartholomew Hawkins Asset Management Ltd v Bartholomew Hawkins Ltd [2020] EWHC 1816 (QB) (09 June 2020)

Bartholomew Hawkins Asset Management Ltd v Bartholomew Hawkins Ltd [2020] EWHC 1816 (QB) (09 June 2020)

The claimant demonstrated a serious issue to be tried regarding breach of the BPA by the defendant's refusal to provide access to client data. Damages would not be an adequate remedy due to the risk of client loss and reputational harm, and the defendant's limited resources. The balance of convenience favours granting the injunction, as the claimant is unable to service clients without access. The risk of GDPR breach is not sufficient to outweigh the claimant's interests, as access may be justified under contract performance or legitimate interests provisions of the GDPR.

Citation
[2020] EWHC 1816 (QB)
Parties
Claimant: Bartholomew Hawkins Asset Management Limited; Defendant: Bartholomew Hawkins Limited
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
09 June 2020
Procedural Posture
Interim Injunction Application / Interlocutory (application for Interim Relief Pending Trial)
Outcome
Interim injunction granted; claimant's costs in the case.
Legal Topics
Interim Injunctions, Business Purchase Agreements, Breach of Contract, Data Access Rights, GDPR Compliance
Contract Law Commercial Law Data Protection Interim Injunctions Business Purchase Agreements Breach of Contract Data Access Rights GDPR Compliance

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 2 Authorities cited 5 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Bartholomew Hawkins Asset Management Limited

Claimant

Bartholomew Hawkins Limited

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Interim Injunction Application / Interlocutory (application for Interim Relief Pending Trial)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the defendant breached the Business Purchase Agreement by withdrawing access to client data/software platform
  2. 2 Whether the claimant is entitled to an interim injunction to restore access to the IO platform
  3. 3 Whether granting access would breach GDPR obligations

Ratio Decidendi

The claimant demonstrated a serious issue to be tried regarding breach of the BPA by the defendant's refusal to provide access to client data. Damages would not be an adequate remedy due to the risk of client loss and reputational harm, and the defendant's limited resources. The balance of convenience favours granting the injunction, as the claimant is unable to service clients without access. The risk of GDPR breach is not sufficient to outweigh the claimant's interests, as access may be justified under contract performance or legitimate interests provisions of the GDPR.

Court Disposition

Interim injunction granted; claimant's costs in the case.

Orders

  • Defendant to restore claimant's access to the IO platform by 10:00am on 10 June 2020.
  • Defendant not to restrict claimant's access to the IO platform until further order or agreement.