Dyson Technology Ltd v Strutt

Dyson Technology Ltd v Strutt

Clause 19.1 is valid and enforceable as it is no wider than reasonably necessary to protect Dyson's legitimate business interests in confidential information, and an injunction is appropriate as there is no evidence of hardship to Mr Strutt and no exceptional circumstances to refuse enforcement.

Parties
Claimant: Dyson Technology Limited; Defendant: Ben Strutt
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
25 November 2005
Procedural Posture
Employment/restrictive Covenant / Final Judgment
Outcome
injunction granted; clause 19.1 declared valid and enforceable
Legal Topics
Restrictive Covenants, Confidential Information, Restraint of Trade, Injunctions
Employment Law Contract Law Restrictive Covenants Confidential Information Restraint of Trade 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 3 Authorities cited 14 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Dyson Technology Limited

Claimant

Ben Strutt

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Employment/restrictive Covenant / Final Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether clause 19.1 of Mr Strutt's contract is valid and enforceable as a restraint of trade
  2. 2 Whether an injunction should be granted to enforce clause 19.1 against Mr Strutt

Ratio Decidendi

Clause 19.1 is valid and enforceable as it is no wider than reasonably necessary to protect Dyson's legitimate business interests in confidential information, and an injunction is appropriate as there is no evidence of hardship to Mr Strutt and no exceptional circumstances to refuse enforcement.

Court Disposition

injunction granted; clause 19.1 declared valid and enforceable

Orders

  • Injunction granted restraining Mr Strutt from engaging in the design of vacuum cleaners for a competitor until 22 April 2006
  • Declaration that clause 19.1 is valid and enforceable