Create Financial Management LLP v Lee & Anor [2020] EWHC 2046 (QB) (28 July 2020)

Create Financial Management LLP v Lee & Anor [2020] EWHC 2046 (QB) (28 July 2020)

The court exercised its discretion to vary the Schedule to the Order by removing clients where there was no real prospect of the Claimant succeeding at trial for a final springboard injunction, as no relevant competitive advantage was established. The court declined to make a declaration on third party contempt, finding it inappropriate to rule in the abstract. The court ordered the Claimant to send corrective emails to clients due to misleading prior communications. The court held it had no jurisdiction to grant permission to appeal as the application was not made at the relevant hearing.

Citation
[2020] EWHC 2046
Parties
Claimant: Create Financial Management LLP; Defendant: Roger Lee; Defendant: Karen Scott
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
28 July 2020
Procedural Posture
Interim Injunction Application (springboard Injunction) / Post Judgment, Further Hearing on Consequential Matters
Outcome
Schedule to the Order varied; declaration on third party conduct refused; corrective emails ordered; permission to appeal refused for lack of jurisdiction.
Legal Topics
Springboard Injunctions, Variation of Interim Orders, Contempt of Court, Third Party Conduct, Corrective Communications, Permission to Appeal
Commercial Law Employment Law Injunctions Springboard Injunctions 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 8 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

Interim Injunction Application (springboard Injunction) / Post Judgment, Further Hearing on Consequential Matters

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether certain clients should be removed from the Schedule to the Order for interim injunction
  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 and third party providers

Ratio Decidendi

The court exercised its discretion to vary the Schedule to the Order by removing clients where there was no real prospect of the Claimant succeeding at trial for a final springboard injunction, as no relevant competitive advantage was established. The court declined to make a declaration on third party contempt, finding it inappropriate to rule in the abstract. The court ordered the Claimant to send corrective emails to clients due to misleading prior communications. The court held it had no jurisdiction to grant permission to appeal as the application was not made at the relevant hearing.

Court Disposition

Schedule to the Order varied; declaration on third party conduct refused; corrective emails ordered; permission to appeal refused for lack of jurisdiction.

Orders

  • Schedule to the Order to be amended by removing specified clients.
  • Order to be modified to revise mechanism for third party transfers, replacing paragraph 1.2 with alternative wording.