Croesus Financial Services Ltd v Bradshaw & Anor

Croesus Financial Services Ltd v Bradshaw & Anor

The restrictive covenants were reasonable and enforceable. Both defendants breached the non-solicitation and non-dealing clauses by soliciting and dealing with former clients. There was no repudiatory breach by the claimant. The defendants acted in concert to transfer clients, amounting to an unlawful means conspiracy. Damages are awarded to the claimant, and a limited injunction is granted for the remainder of the restraint period.

Parties
Claimant: Croesus Financial Services Limited; Defendant: Mr Matthew Bradshaw; Defendant: Mr David Bradshaw
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
25 November 2013
Procedural Posture
Civil (employment/commercial) / Judgment After Trial
Outcome
Claim allowed in part
Legal Topics
Enforceability of Restrictive Covenants, Breach of Contract, Duty of Confidence, Unlawful Means Conspiracy, Inducement of Breach of Contract, Damages Quantification
Employment Law Contract Law Restrictive Covenants Confidentiality Tort (conspiracy) Enforceability of Restrictive Covenants Breach of Contract Duty of Confidence +3 more

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 7 Authorities cited 8 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 6
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Croesus Financial Services Limited

Claimant

Mr Matthew Bradshaw

Defendant

Mr David Bradshaw

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil (employment/commercial) / Judgment After Trial

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether restrictive covenants in the employment contracts were enforceable and breached
  2. 2 Whether the defendants misused confidential information and solicited clients in breach of contract
  3. 3 Whether there was an unlawful means conspiracy to injure the claimant's business

Ratio Decidendi

The restrictive covenants were reasonable and enforceable. Both defendants breached the non-solicitation and non-dealing clauses by soliciting and dealing with former clients. There was no repudiatory breach by the claimant. The defendants acted in concert to transfer clients, amounting to an unlawful means conspiracy. Damages are awarded to the claimant, and a limited injunction is granted for the remainder of the restraint period.

Court Disposition

Claim allowed in part

Orders

  • Limited injunction granted prohibiting solicitation, canvassing, and dealing with clients as defined by clause 16.2.1 for the remainder of the restraint period, excluding clients already excluded by undertakings.
  • Damages awarded to the claimant, subject to reductions as specified in the judgment.