Dass Solicitors v Southcott [2009] EWHC B20 (2009) (02 April 2009)

Dass Solicitors v Southcott [2009] EWHC B20 (2009) (02 April 2009)

The court found that the defendant breached both express and implied terms of his employment contract by leaving without notice and soliciting clients while still employed. The claimants established serious questions to be tried, damages would not be an adequate remedy, and the balance of convenience favored granting an injunction. Springboard relief was appropriate to prevent further unfair advantage and economic loss to the claimants.

Citation
[2009] EWHC B20
Parties
Claimant: Claimants; Defendant: Defendant
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
02 April 2009
Procedural Posture
Injunction Application / Without Notice (ex Parte) Hearing, Conducted on Notice
Outcome
Injunction granted
Legal Topics
Injunctions, Springboard Relief, Breach of Contract, Duty of Fidelity
Employment Law Civil Procedure Injunctions Springboard Relief Breach of Contract Duty of Fidelity

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 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Claimants

Claimant

Defendant

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Injunction Application / Without Notice (ex Parte) Hearing, Conducted on Notice

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the defendant breached the express and implied terms of his employment contract by leaving without notice and soliciting clients while still employed
  2. 2 Whether the claimants are entitled to an injunction (springboard relief) to prevent further solicitation or economic loss

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the defendant breached both express and implied terms of his employment contract by leaving without notice and soliciting clients while still employed. The claimants established serious questions to be tried, damages would not be an adequate remedy, and the balance of convenience favored granting an injunction. Springboard relief was appropriate to prevent further unfair advantage and economic loss to the claimants.

Court Disposition

Injunction granted

Orders

  • Injunction granted in terms sought, limited to 27 June 2009
  • Costs reserved