Curemed CC v Van Onselen and Others (21838/2015) [2015] ZAGPPHC 176 (13 April 2015)

Curemed CC v Van Onselen and Others (21838/2015) [2015] ZAGPPHC 176 (13 April 2015)

The court found that the applicant had a proprietary interest in the client information and that such information was confidential and worthy of protection. The restraint of trade clause was enforceable, but only in respect of clients who formed part of the portfolios of the three respondents, not all clients of the applicant. The relief sought was unreasonably wide, but partial enforcement was appropriate. The respondents were interdicted from soliciting or dealing with their former client portfolios for twelve months. The fourth respondent was also interdicted from unlawfully competing using confidential information obtained from the applicant. The applicant failed to prove possession...

Citation
[2015] ZAGPPHC 176
Parties
Applicant: Curemed CC; Respondent: Vicky Van Onselen; Respondent: Marietha Ciampi; Respondent: Hester du Preëz; Respondent: SHC Projects Proprietary Limited
Court
North Gauteng High Court, Pretoria
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
13 April 2015
Case Number
21838/2015
Procedural Posture
Urgent Application / First Instance Judgment
Outcome
Application granted in part; interdicts issued against the first to third respondents and the fourth respondent for twelve months; no costs order.
Judges
Janse van Nieuwenhuizen
Legal Topics
Restraint of Trade, Confidential Information, Customer Connections, Interdict, Unlawful Competition
Commercial and Corporate Civil Procedure Restraint of Trade Confidential Information Customer Connections Interdict Unlawful Competition

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 6 Authorities cited 9 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Curemed CC

Applicant

Vicky Van Onselen

Respondent

Marietha Ciampi

Respondent

Hester du Preëz

Respondent

SHC Projects Proprietary Limited

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Urgent Application / First Instance Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the restraint of trade clause in the Healthcare Adviser Agreements is enforceable against the three respondents.
  2. 2 Whether the applicant has a proprietary interest in the client information and whether such information is confidential.
  3. 3 Whether the relief sought by the applicant is unreasonably wide in scope and duration.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the applicant had a proprietary interest in the client information and that such information was confidential and worthy of protection. The restraint of trade clause was enforceable, but only in respect of clients who formed part of the portfolios of the three respondents, not all clients of the applicant. The relief sought was unreasonably wide, but partial enforcement was appropriate. The respondents were interdicted from soliciting or dealing with their former client portfolios for twelve months. The fourth respondent was also interdicted from unlawfully competing using confidential information obtained from the applicant. The applicant failed to prove possession...

Court Disposition

Application granted in part; interdicts issued against the first to third respondents and the fourth respondent for twelve months; no costs order.

Orders

  • The First, Second and Third Respondents are interdicted and restrained for twelve months from unlawfully competing with the Applicant by using confidential data and soliciting clients from their former portfolios.
  • The First, Second and Third Respondents are interdicted from soliciting the clients in their former portfolios to terminate association, discontinue transactions, or act contrary to the Applicant's interests for twelve months.