HSBC Gibbs Ltd v Torrance [1998] ScotCS 87 (3 December 1998)

HSBC Gibbs Ltd v Torrance [1998] ScotCS 87 (3 December 1998)

The court held that the restrictive covenant, properly construed in the context of insurance broking, was reasonable and afforded no more than necessary protection to the pursuers' legitimate interests. The pursuers established a prima facie case of breach, and the balance of convenience favoured granting interim interdict to prevent loss of clients, profits, and goodwill, which would be difficult to quantify.

Citation
[1998] ScotCS 87
Parties
Pursuer: HSBC Gibbs Limited; Defender: Alan Torrance
Jurisdiction
Scotland
Judgment Date
03 December 1998
Procedural Posture
Interim Interdict Application (employment/restrictive Covenant) / Interim/interlocutory
Outcome
Interim interdict granted in favour of the pursuers.
Legal Topics
Restrictive Covenants, Non Solicitation Clauses, Interim Interdicts, Employee Competition, Termination of Employment
Employment Law Contract Law Restrictive Covenants Non Solicitation Clauses Interim Interdicts Employee Competition Termination of Employment

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 2 Authorities cited 2 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

HSBC Gibbs Limited

Pursuer

Alan Torrance

Defender

Procedural Posture

Interim Interdict Application (employment/restrictive Covenant) / Interim/interlocutory

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the restrictive covenant in the defender's contract was reasonable and enforceable
  2. 2 Whether the pursuers had established a prima facie case for interim interdict
  3. 3 Whether the balance of convenience favoured granting interim interdict

Ratio Decidendi

The court held that the restrictive covenant, properly construed in the context of insurance broking, was reasonable and afforded no more than necessary protection to the pursuers' legitimate interests. The pursuers established a prima facie case of breach, and the balance of convenience favoured granting interim interdict to prevent loss of clients, profits, and goodwill, which would be difficult to quantify.

Court Disposition

Interim interdict granted in favour of the pursuers.

Orders

  • Defender interdicted ad interim until 31 July 1999 from transacting business with, canvassing, soliciting, or endeavouring to take away from the pursuers any customers or clients with whom he had personal dealings in the last twelve months of his employment.