Affinity Workforce Solutions Ltd v McCann & Ors [2019] EWHC 2829 (Ch) (24 October 2019)

Affinity Workforce Solutions Ltd v McCann & Ors [2019] EWHC 2829 (Ch) (24 October 2019)

The balance of convenience and risk of injustice favoured refusal of the general non-compete injunction, as Affinity's legitimate interests could be adequately protected by targeted undertakings not to solicit or deal with identified customers and candidates, and Affinity's change of position was not justified by...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2019] EWHC 2829 (Ch)
Parties
Claimant: Affinity Workforce Solutions Limited; Defendant: TCE Kathryn McCann; Defendant: Lizzie McDonnell; Defendant: Clare Hind; Defendant: Wendy Rowell; Defendant: Susanne Southey; Defendant: Tradewind Recruitment Limited
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
24 October 2019
Procedural Posture
Interim Injunction Application / Interlocutory
Outcome
Injunction refused; undertakings accepted
Legal Topics
Restrictive Covenants, Non Compete Clauses, Post Termination Restrictions, TUPE Transfers, Injunctions, Breach of Contract, Inducement of Breach
Employment Law Contract Law Restrictive Covenants Non Compete Clauses Post Termination Restrictions TUPE Transfers Injunctions Breach of Contract +1 more

Source-derived case record

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 6 Authorities cited 12 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Affinity Workforce Solutions Limited

Claimant

TCE Kathryn McCann

Defendant

Lizzie McDonnell

Defendant

Clare Hind

Defendant

Wendy Rowell

Defendant

Susanne Southey

Defendant

Tradewind Recruitment Limited

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Interim Injunction Application / Interlocutory

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether employees should be restrained by injunction from working for a competitor during post-termination restriction period
  2. 2 Whether non-compete covenants were validly incorporated into employment contracts
  3. 3 Adequacy of damages as remedy

Ratio Decidendi

The balance of convenience and risk of injustice favoured refusal of the general non-compete injunction, as Affinity's legitimate interests could be adequately protected by targeted undertakings not to solicit or deal with identified customers and candidates, and Affinity's change of position was not justified by evidence. The hardship to employees outweighed the risk to Affinity, especially given uncertainty about contractual incorporation of the covenants.

Court Disposition

Injunction refused; undertakings accepted

Orders

  • Employees to give undertakings to the Court not to solicit or deal with identified customers and candidates for remainder of restriction period