Monex Europe Ltd v Pothecary & Anor

Monex Europe Ltd v Pothecary & Anor

The non-competition covenant in clause 2.1.1 is unreasonably wide in territorial scope and duration, and Monex has not demonstrated that such a global restraint is necessary to protect its legitimate business interests. The balance of convenience weighs in favour of the Defendants, and the application for interim injunction is dismissed.

Parties
Claimant: Monex Europe Limited; Defendant: Charles Pothecary; Defendant: Guy Kaufman
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
21 June 2019
Procedural Posture
Application for Interim Injunction / Ruling on Interim Relief
Outcome
application dismissed
Legal Topics
Restraint of Trade, Restrictive Covenants, Post Termination Restrictions, Interim Injunctions
Employment Law Contract Law Restraint of Trade Restrictive Covenants Post Termination Restrictions 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 4 Authorities cited 8 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 7
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Monex Europe Limited

Claimant

Charles Pothecary

Defendant

Guy Kaufman

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Application for Interim Injunction / Ruling on Interim Relief

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether clause 2.1.1 of the employment contract is a reasonable restraint of trade
  2. 2 Whether the non-competition covenant is enforceable
  3. 3 Whether the drafting errors in the contract can be corrected or severed

Ratio Decidendi

The non-competition covenant in clause 2.1.1 is unreasonably wide in territorial scope and duration, and Monex has not demonstrated that such a global restraint is necessary to protect its legitimate business interests. The balance of convenience weighs in favour of the Defendants, and the application for interim injunction is dismissed.

Court Disposition

application dismissed