Create Financial Management LLP v Lee & Anor

Create Financial Management LLP v Lee & Anor

The court held that the defendants' application to remove certain clients from the injunction schedule was justified as there was no real prospect of the claimant succeeding at trial for those clients; the order should be varied accordingly. The court declined to make a general declaration regarding third party contempt but modified the order's wording to allow client transfers under specified conditions. The claimant was required to send corrective emails to clients and notify the defendants of recipients. The court lacked jurisdiction to grant permission to appeal as the application was not made at the appropriate hearing.

Parties
Claimant: Create Financial Management LLP; Defendant: Roger Lee; Defendant: Karen Scott
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
28 July 2020
Procedural Posture
Civil / Post Interim Injunction, Further Hearing on Consequential Matters
Outcome
Applications granted in part, refused in part; order varied; no jurisdiction to grant permission to appeal.
Legal Topics
Springboard Injunction, Variation of Interim Orders, Contempt of Court, Third Party Conduct, Corrective Communications, Permission to Appeal
Injunctions Employment Law Commercial Law Springboard Injunction Variation of Interim Orders Contempt of Court Third Party Conduct Corrective Communications +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 3 Authorities cited 7 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Create Financial Management LLP

Claimant

Roger Lee

Defendant

Karen Scott

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil / Post Interim Injunction, Further Hearing on Consequential Matters

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether certain clients should be removed from the injunction schedule
  2. 2 Whether third party financial providers could be in contempt for transferring clients
  3. 3 Whether the claimant should send corrective letters to clients

Ratio Decidendi

The court held that the defendants' application to remove certain clients from the injunction schedule was justified as there was no real prospect of the claimant succeeding at trial for those clients; the order should be varied accordingly. The court declined to make a general declaration regarding third party contempt but modified the order's wording to allow client transfers under specified conditions. The claimant was required to send corrective emails to clients and notify the defendants of recipients. The court lacked jurisdiction to grant permission to appeal as the application was not made at the appropriate hearing.

Court Disposition

Applications granted in part, refused in part; order varied; no jurisdiction to grant permission to appeal.

Orders

  • Schedule to the order varied by removal of specified clients
  • Order wording modified to allow client transfers under specified conditions