DONE RITE 2017 LTD v WRIGHT [2018] NZHC 3194

DONE RITE 2017 LTD v WRIGHT [2018] NZHC 3194

An interim injunction was justified because there was a serious question to be tried and prima facie evidence of breach of the restraint clause, damages would likely be inadequate given risk to goodwill and market confusion in a small confined area, and the balance of convenience favoured the applicant.

Citation
[2018] NZHC 3194
Parties
Applicant: Done Rite 2017 Ltd; First Respondent: Rodney Bryan Wright; Second Respondent: Toni Louise Chittock; Third Respondent: Done-Rite Contracting 2007 Ltd; Fourth Respondent: Rees River Supplies Limited
Court
High Court
Jurisdiction
New Zealand
Judgment Date
6 December 2018
Procedural Posture
Interlocutory Application for Interim Injunction (restraint of Trade) / Interlocutory Hearing (telephone Conference)
Outcome
Interim injunction granted
Legal Topics
Restraint of Trade, Interim Injunction, Goodwill, Contract Variation, Adequacy of Damages
Contract Law Equity Civil Procedure Restraint of Trade Interim Injunction Goodwill Contract Variation Adequacy of Damages

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Legal principles 3 Authorities cited 1 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Done Rite 2017 Ltd

Applicant

Rodney Bryan Wright

First Respondent

Toni Louise Chittock

Second Respondent

Done-Rite Contracting 2007 Ltd

Third Respondent

Rees River Supplies Limited

Fourth Respondent

Procedural Posture

Interlocutory Application for Interim Injunction (restraint of Trade) / Interlocutory Hearing (telephone Conference)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the restraint of trade clause in the sale agreement is enforceable at interlocutory stage
  2. 2 Whether there is a prima facie breach of the restraint by the respondents
  3. 3 Whether damages would be an adequate remedy

Ratio Decidendi

An interim injunction was justified because there was a serious question to be tried and prima facie evidence of breach of the restraint clause, damages would likely be inadequate given risk to goodwill and market confusion in a small confined area, and the balance of convenience favoured the applicant.

Court Disposition

Interim injunction granted

Orders

  • Prohibiting the respondents from directly or indirectly being involved or engaged with any business or enterprise which is similar to or competes with the applicant's business in the Queenstown Lakes District until further order of the Court.
  • Prohibiting the respondents from soliciting or enticing away, or attempting to do so, any person or entity that is a client or employee of the applicant within the Queenstown Lakes District until further order of the Court.