SDI Retail Services Ltd v King & Ors [2018] EWHC 1697 (Comm) (02 July 2018)

SDI Retail Services Ltd v King & Ors [2018] EWHC 1697 (Comm) (02 July 2018)

There is a serious issue to be tried regarding the construction of the Agreement and compliance with paragraph 5.4. Damages would not be an adequate remedy for SDIR due to quantification difficulties and contractual limitations. The balance of convenience favours preserving the status quo by granting an interim injunction pending a return date.

Citation
[2018] EWHC 1697 (Comm)
Parties
Claimant: SDI Retail Services Limited; Defendant: David King; Defendant: Paul Murray; Defendant: The Rangers Football Limited; Defendant: Rangers Retail Limited
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
02 July 2018
Procedural Posture
Commercial Interim Injunction Application / Interim Application Hearing
Outcome
Interim injunction granted pending return date
Legal Topics
Interim Injunctions, Matching Rights, Adequacy of Damages, Contractual Construction
Contract Law Commercial Law Interim Injunctions Matching Rights Adequacy of Damages Contractual Construction

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 6 Authorities cited 10 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

SDI Retail Services Limited

Claimant

David King

Defendant

Paul Murray

Defendant

The Rangers Football Limited

Defendant

Rangers Retail Limited

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Commercial Interim Injunction Application / Interim Application Hearing

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether Rangers breached contractual obligations by failing to provide compliant Notice of Offer under the Agreement
  2. 2 Whether SDIR is entitled to interim injunctive relief to preserve its matching right
  3. 3 Adequacy of damages as a remedy for breach

Ratio Decidendi

There is a serious issue to be tried regarding the construction of the Agreement and compliance with paragraph 5.4. Damages would not be an adequate remedy for SDIR due to quantification difficulties and contractual limitations. The balance of convenience favours preserving the status quo by granting an interim injunction pending a return date.

Court Disposition

Interim injunction granted pending return date

Orders

  • Defendants are injuncted in the terms sought in the draft order until the return date, 10 July 2018