Back Office Ltd v Percival & Ors

Back Office Ltd v Percival & Ors

Mr Percival, by his email of 21 February 2013, and Mr Richardson, by his calls on 12 February 2013, solicited the business of prohibited clients in breach of undertakings. Liquidity is vicariously liable for these acts as they were committed by its agents in the course of employment. The directors, Mr Foulsham and Mr Tipper, neither authorised nor failed to take reasonable steps to prevent the breaches, so contempt is not established against them.

Parties
Claimant/applicant: Back Office Limited; Defendant/respondent: Mr James Percival; Defendant: Mr Mateusz Rychly; Defendant: Mr Ricky Willars; Defendant/respondent: Mr Jonathan Tipper; Defendant/respondent: Mr James Foulsham; Defendant/respondent: Liquidity Group Solutions Limited
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
23 May 2013
Procedural Posture
Contempt Application (civil) / Judgment After Contested Hearing
Outcome
Mr Percival and Liquidity Group Solutions Limited found guilty of contempt of court; applications against Mr Foulsham and Mr Tipper dismissed.
Legal Topics
Breach of Undertaking, Contempt of Court, Restrictive Covenants, Vicarious Liability, Directors' Duties
Employment Law Civil Procedure Company Law Breach of Undertaking Contempt of Court Restrictive Covenants Vicarious Liability Directors' Duties

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 12 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Back Office Limited

Claimant/applicant

Mr James Percival

Defendant/respondent

Mr Mateusz Rychly

Defendant

Mr Ricky Willars

Defendant

Mr Jonathan Tipper

Defendant/respondent

Mr James Foulsham

Defendant/respondent

Liquidity Group Solutions Limited

Defendant/respondent

Procedural Posture

Contempt Application (civil) / Judgment After Contested Hearing

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether Mr Percival and Liquidity Group Solutions Limited breached undertakings by soliciting prohibited clients and are in contempt of court
  2. 2 Whether Mr Foulsham and Mr Tipper are personally liable for contempt as directors for alleged breaches by employees/agents
  3. 3 Whether the acts of Mr Richardson and Mr Percival render Liquidity vicariously liable for contempt

Ratio Decidendi

Mr Percival, by his email of 21 February 2013, and Mr Richardson, by his calls on 12 February 2013, solicited the business of prohibited clients in breach of undertakings. Liquidity is vicariously liable for these acts as they were committed by its agents in the course of employment. The directors, Mr Foulsham and Mr Tipper, neither authorised nor failed to take reasonable steps to prevent the breaches, so contempt is not established against them.

Court Disposition

Mr Percival and Liquidity Group Solutions Limited found guilty of contempt of court; applications against Mr Foulsham and Mr Tipper dismissed.

Orders

  • Mr Percival and Liquidity Group Solutions Limited are guilty of contempt of court.
  • Applications against Mr Foulsham and Mr Tipper are dismissed.