We use cookies to offer you a better experience and analyse site traffic.
By continuing to use this website, you consent to the use of cookies in accordance with our Cookie Policy.
We use cookies to offer you a better experience and analyse site traffic.
By continuing to use this website, you consent to the use of cookies in accordance with our Cookie Policy.
Members of the Employment Team will take a look at some of the changes to the way we work caused by the Pandemic. Read more >
Pleadings are the first and vital step of tribunal proceedings. This webinar aims to give practical guidance as to what should be included in a well-drafted claim and response. Read more >
Social media:
High Court rules on economic torts claim:
The High Court has recently revisited the vexed area of economic torts.
In Pepe's the claimant sought damages alleging conspiracy to procure a breach of contract, unlawful interference with the claimant’s business and procuring a breach of contract. The claim was for just over £500,000.
The claimant failed in its claim for conspiracy and unlawful interference because it failed to show an intention to injure the claimant’s business and the actions complained of were not unlawful as against the second defendant which was the party to the franchise agreement.
The claim for procuring succeeded. The High Court held that the relevant defendants were fixed with actual, or if not "blind eye" constructive knowledge of a franchise agreement and were therefore liable to the claimant on that basis.
The claimant was awarded damages in the sum £2,523.07 - less than 1% of the damages claimed.
Tim Welch acted for defendants’ 3 to 9.
Pepe's Piri Piri Ltd v Junaid [2019] EWHC 2097 (QB); [2019] 7 WLUK 596
29.10.2019
