Blade Motor Group Ltd v Reynolds & Reynolds Ltd

Blade Motor Group Ltd v Reynolds & Reynolds Ltd

Blade failed to prove that damages would not be an adequate remedy for loss of access to the KDMS software; the balance of convenience and delay in seeking relief weigh against granting a mandatory interim injunction; status quo is that Blade has no access to the software.

Parties
Claimant: Blade Motor Group Limited; Defendant: Reynolds & Reynolds Limited
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
23 February 2018
Procedural Posture
Application for Interim Injunction / Ruling on Mandatory Interim Injunction Application
Outcome
Application for mandatory interim injunction refused.
Legal Topics
Interim Injunctions, Mandatory Injunctions, Specific Performance, Rectification, Termination of Contract, Balance of Convenience

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

Parties

Blade Motor Group Limited

Claimant

Reynolds & Reynolds Limited

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Application for Interim Injunction / Ruling on Mandatory Interim Injunction Application

  1. 1 Whether the claimant is entitled to a mandatory interim injunction requiring the defendant to provide access to business software pending trial
  2. 2 Whether damages would be an adequate remedy for the claimant
  3. 3 Whether the balance of convenience favours granting the injunction

Ratio Decidendi

Blade failed to prove that damages would not be an adequate remedy for loss of access to the KDMS software; the balance of convenience and delay in seeking relief weigh against granting a mandatory interim injunction; status quo is that Blade has no access to the software.

Court Disposition

Application for mandatory interim injunction refused.

Orders

  • Blade's application for mandatory interim injunctive relief is refused.