OTS Logistics Belgium NV & Anor v Clarke & Anor

OTS Logistics Belgium NV & Anor v Clarke & Anor

There is a serious issue to be tried regarding whether the defendants breached restrictive covenants and misused confidential information, but the evidence of actual solicitation and misuse is thin. Damages are not an adequate remedy for either party, but the balance of convenience does not favour granting an injunction. The appropriate course is to refuse interim injunctive relief and order a speedy trial.

Parties
Claimant: OTS Logistics Belgium NV; Claimant: Ocean Express Limited; Defendant: Robert Paul Clarke; Defendant: Britam Shipping Ltd
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
06 December 2010
Procedural Posture
Civil Application / Interim Injunction Application
Outcome
Interim injunction refused; speedy trial ordered.
Legal Topics
Restrictive Covenants, Confidential Information, Non Compete Clauses, Solicitation, Interim Injunctions
Contract Law Employment Law Restrictive Covenants Confidential Information Non Compete Clauses Solicitation Interim Injunctions

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 2 Authorities cited 3 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 4
Sign in to unlock

Parties

OTS Logistics Belgium NV

Claimant

Ocean Express Limited

Claimant

Robert Paul Clarke

Defendant

Britam Shipping Ltd

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil Application / Interim Injunction Application

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the defendants breached restrictive covenants in a share sale and directors service agreement
  2. 2 Whether confidential information was misused by the defendants
  3. 3 Whether the claimants are entitled to interim injunctive relief

Ratio Decidendi

There is a serious issue to be tried regarding whether the defendants breached restrictive covenants and misused confidential information, but the evidence of actual solicitation and misuse is thin. Damages are not an adequate remedy for either party, but the balance of convenience does not favour granting an injunction. The appropriate course is to refuse interim injunctive relief and order a speedy trial.

Court Disposition

Interim injunction refused; speedy trial ordered.

Orders

  • No order restraining the defendants from carrying on business or solicitation pending trial.
  • Order for a speedy trial of the action.