Visage Ltd & Anor v Mehan & Ors [2017] EWHC 2734 (QB) (03 November 2017)

Visage Ltd & Anor v Mehan & Ors [2017] EWHC 2734 (QB) (03 November 2017)

The claimants established a strong prima facie case of breach of contract and fiduciary duty by the defendants, justifying interim enforcement of restrictive covenants and springboard relief to prevent further unfair competitive advantage. The balance of convenience favoured maintaining the contractual restrictions until trial. The exceptional disclosure orders sought were not justified on the evidence or legal principles and were refused.

Citation
[2017] EWHC 2734
Parties
Claimant/applicant: Visage Limited; Claimant/applicant: GSCM (UK) Limited; Defendant/respondent: Ms Anita Mehan; Defendant/respondent: Ms Rita Abrol; Defendant/respondent: Ms Tina Khosla; Defendant/respondent: Mr Manoj Vadhera; Defendant: Mr Sanjeev Mehan
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
03 November 2017
Procedural Posture
Interim Application for Injunctive Relief in Breach of Contract and Fiduciary Duty Proceedings / Interlocutory (application for Interim Injunctions and Ancillary Orders)
Outcome
Interim injunctions enforcing restrictive covenants and springboard relief granted; applications for ancillary disclosure orders refused; costs of the hearing on 23 October 2017 awarded to the First Defendant; all other costs reserved.
Legal Topics
Restrictive Covenants, Springboard Injunctions, Breach of Contract, Fiduciary Duties, Interim Relief, Confidential Information, Employee Competition
Employment Law Commercial Law Restrictive Covenants Springboard Injunctions Breach of Contract Fiduciary Duties Interim Relief Confidential Information +1 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 5 Authorities cited 14 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Visage Limited

Claimant/applicant

GSCM (UK) Limited

Claimant/applicant

Ms Anita Mehan

Defendant/respondent

Ms Rita Abrol

Defendant/respondent

Ms Tina Khosla

Defendant/respondent

Mr Manoj Vadhera

Defendant/respondent

Mr Sanjeev Mehan

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Interim Application for Injunctive Relief in Breach of Contract and Fiduciary Duty Proceedings / Interlocutory (application for Interim Injunctions and Ancillary Orders)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether interim injunctive relief should be granted to enforce restrictive covenants against former employees
  2. 2 Whether springboard relief should be granted to prevent unfair competitive advantage
  3. 3 Whether ancillary disclosure orders should be made against the defendants

Ratio Decidendi

The claimants established a strong prima facie case of breach of contract and fiduciary duty by the defendants, justifying interim enforcement of restrictive covenants and springboard relief to prevent further unfair competitive advantage. The balance of convenience favoured maintaining the contractual restrictions until trial. The exceptional disclosure orders sought were not justified on the evidence or legal principles and were refused.

Court Disposition

Interim injunctions enforcing restrictive covenants and springboard relief granted; applications for ancillary disclosure orders refused; costs of the hearing on 23 October 2017 awarded to the First Defendant; all other costs reserved.

Orders

  • Interim injunctive relief granted in respect of restrictive covenants as drafted by claimants against Second to Fourth Defendants until trial or further order
  • Springboard relief granted against Second to Fourth Defendants until trial or further order