Create Financial Management LLP v Lee & Anor [2020] EWHC 1933 (QB) (17 July 2020)

Create Financial Management LLP v Lee & Anor [2020] EWHC 1933 (QB) (17 July 2020)

The claimant failed to demonstrate a serious issue to be tried that the defendants' alleged breaches resulted in a substantial and ongoing unlawful competitive advantage justifying interim springboard relief. The evidence did not establish that any advantage would persist beyond the period to trial, and damages would be an adequate remedy for the defendants. The balance of convenience did not favour granting the injunction.

Citation
[2020] EWHC 1933
Parties
Claimant: Create Financial Management LLP; Defendant: Roger Lee; Defendant: Karen Scott
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
17 July 2020
Procedural Posture
Interim Injunction Application / Interlocutory (application for Interim Springboard Injunction Pending Expedited Trial)
Outcome
Interim springboard injunction refused
Legal Topics
Springboard Injunctions, Breach of Contract, Restrictive Covenants, Confidential Information, Adequacy of Damages, Balance of Convenience, Clean Hands Doctrine
Contract Law Employment Law Commercial Law Springboard Injunctions Breach of Contract Restrictive Covenants Confidential Information Adequacy of Damages +2 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 8 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 5
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Create Financial Management LLP

Claimant

Roger Lee

Defendant

Karen Scott

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Interim Injunction Application / Interlocutory (application for Interim Springboard Injunction Pending Expedited Trial)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the defendants breached contractual obligations to hand over clients and delete confidential information
  2. 2 Whether the defendants gained an unlawful competitive advantage ('springboard') by reason of such breaches
  3. 3 Whether the claimant is entitled to an interim springboard injunction restraining solicitation of clients pending trial

Ratio Decidendi

The claimant failed to demonstrate a serious issue to be tried that the defendants' alleged breaches resulted in a substantial and ongoing unlawful competitive advantage justifying interim springboard relief. The evidence did not establish that any advantage would persist beyond the period to trial, and damages would be an adequate remedy for the defendants. The balance of convenience did not favour granting the injunction.

Court Disposition

Interim springboard injunction refused

Orders

  • Application for interim springboard injunction dismissed
  • No order for fortification of cross-undertaking in damages