TP Global Operations Limited (trading as 1Global) v Insightful Technology Limited

TP Global Operations Limited (trading as 1Global) v Insightful Technology Limited

The claimant, as controller, is contractually and legally entitled to the return of its data from the defendant, the processor, without precondition of end user consents or further payments beyond the capped fee. The defendant's refusal to transfer the data absent such conditions is not justified by the contract or law. Damages are not an adequate remedy due to the regulatory context and the nature of the data. A mandatory injunction is granted to compel the data transfer, subject to the claimant's undertaking to pay the capped fee.

Parties
Claimant/applicant: TP Global Operations Limited (trading as 1Global); Defendant/respondent: Insightful Technology Limited
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
12 June 2024
Procedural Posture
Commercial Application (specific Performance/interlocutory Injunction) / Interlocutory Application for Mandatory Injunction
Outcome
interlocutory mandatory injunction granted
Legal Topics
Specific Performance, Mandatory Injunction, Data Return Obligations, Adequacy of Damages, Regulatory Compliance
Contract Law Data Protection Law Commercial Law Specific Performance Mandatory Injunction Data Return Obligations Adequacy of Damages Regulatory Compliance

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 2 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

TP Global Operations Limited (trading as 1Global)

Claimant/applicant

Insightful Technology Limited

Defendant/respondent

Procedural Posture

Commercial Application (specific Performance/interlocutory Injunction) / Interlocutory Application for Mandatory Injunction

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the claimant is entitled to a mandatory injunction for the return of data under the services agreement and GDPR.
  2. 2 Whether the defendant can lawfully withhold data pending end user consents or additional payments.
  3. 3 Whether damages would be an adequate remedy for the claimant.

Ratio Decidendi

The claimant, as controller, is contractually and legally entitled to the return of its data from the defendant, the processor, without precondition of end user consents or further payments beyond the capped fee. The defendant's refusal to transfer the data absent such conditions is not justified by the contract or law. Damages are not an adequate remedy due to the regulatory context and the nature of the data. A mandatory injunction is granted to compel the data transfer, subject to the claimant's undertaking to pay the capped fee.

Court Disposition

interlocutory mandatory injunction granted

Orders

  • Defendant to transfer all relevant client data to the claimant in accordance with the services agreement and Schedule 6.
  • Claimant to provide an undertaking to pay up to £150,000 to the defendant upon data transfer.