Hinton & Higgs (UK) Ltd v Murphy [1988] ScotCS CSOH_2 (15 July 1988)

Hinton & Higgs (UK) Ltd v Murphy [1988] ScotCS CSOH_2 (15 July 1988)

The restrictive covenant in clause 14 is unreasonably wide and unenforceable as it covers previous and present clients, lacks geographical limitation, and extends to group companies without justification. Deletion of 'previous' clients would not cure the unreasonableness. However, the restriction against passing on confidential information is severable and enforceable, justifying interim interdict on that ground.

Citation
[1988] ScotCS CSOH_2
Parties
Pursuer: Hinton & Higgs (UK) Ltd; Defender: Murphy
Jurisdiction
Scotland
Judgment Date
15 July 1988
Procedural Posture
Civil / Interim Interdict Recall and Re Application
Outcome
Interim interdict recalled in part; interim interdict granted de novo in respect of confidential information only.
Legal Topics
Restraint of Trade, Restrictive Covenants, Confidential Information, Severance of Contract Terms, Interim Interdict
Employment Law Contract Law Restraint of Trade Restrictive Covenants Confidential Information Severance of Contract Terms Interim Interdict

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 4 Authorities cited 5 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Hinton & Higgs (UK) Ltd

Pursuer

Murphy

Defender

Procedural Posture

Civil / Interim Interdict Recall and Re Application

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the restrictive covenant in clause 14 is enforceable or amounts to an unreasonable restraint of trade
  2. 2 Whether the restriction is too wide in terms of clients covered, geographical scope, and group companies
  3. 3 Whether the clause is severable

Ratio Decidendi

The restrictive covenant in clause 14 is unreasonably wide and unenforceable as it covers previous and present clients, lacks geographical limitation, and extends to group companies without justification. Deletion of 'previous' clients would not cure the unreasonableness. However, the restriction against passing on confidential information is severable and enforceable, justifying interim interdict on that ground.

Court Disposition

Interim interdict recalled in part; interim interdict granted de novo in respect of confidential information only.

Orders

  • Recall of interim interdict previously granted against defenders in respect of working for clients.
  • Grant of interim interdict against defenders passing on confidential information as per second branch of conclusions.