Personal Management Solutions Ltd & Anor v Brake Bros. Ltd & Ors

Personal Management Solutions Ltd & Anor v Brake Bros. Ltd & Ors

The wide claim for loss of exclusivity was pleaded from the outset and is not a new claim. The damages hearing should not be confined to the narrow claim but should encompass the wide claim. The Master proceeded under a misapprehension and the judge was correct to set aside his decision and conduct a merits-based evaluation.

Parties
Claimant/respondent: Personal Management Solutions Limited; Claimant/respondent: Personal Group Benefits Limited; Defendant/appellant: Brake Bros. Limited; Defendant/appellant: Gee 7 Group Limited; Defendant/appellant: Gee 7 Wealth Management Limited; Defendant/appellant: Mark Eaton
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
12 July 2018
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Interlocutory Appeal Decision
Outcome
appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Misuse of Confidential Information, Assessment of Damages, Pleadings, Case Management, Abuse of Process
Commercial Law Confidential Information Contract Law Misuse of Confidential Information Assessment of Damages Pleadings Case Management Abuse of Process

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 3 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Personal Management Solutions Limited

Claimant/respondent

Personal Group Benefits Limited

Claimant/respondent

Brake Bros. Limited

Defendant/appellant

Gee 7 Group Limited

Defendant/appellant

Gee 7 Wealth Management Limited

Defendant/appellant

Mark Eaton

Defendant/appellant

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Interlocutory Appeal Decision

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the claimants can expand their claim on assessment of damages after judgment on liability
  2. 2 Whether the expanded claim constitutes a new claim on liability
  3. 3 Whether the damages hearing should be confined to the narrow claim or include the wide claim for loss of exclusivity

Ratio Decidendi

The wide claim for loss of exclusivity was pleaded from the outset and is not a new claim. The damages hearing should not be confined to the narrow claim but should encompass the wide claim. The Master proceeded under a misapprehension and the judge was correct to set aside his decision and conduct a merits-based evaluation.

Court Disposition

appeal dismissed

Orders

  • 2nd and 3rd Defendants to pay Claimants’ costs of the Appeal, subject to detailed assessment on the standard basis if not agreed.
  • 2nd and 3rd Defendants to pay £65,000 to Claimants on account of costs by 1600hrs on 26th July 2018.