header-logo header-logo

07 October 2016
Issue: 7717 / Categories: Case law , Law digest , In Court
printer mail-detail

Employee

Gamatronic (UK) Ltd and another v Hamilton and another [2016] EWHC 2225 (QB), [2016] All ER (D) 09 (Oct)

The Queen’s Bench Division held, among other things, that the defendant former directors and employees of, and shareholders in, the first claimant company had, to some extent, breached fiduciary duties owed to it and they had breached contractual duties owed under the terms of their employment agreements by assisting in setting up, and acquiring a beneficial interest in, a competing business (Vox). However, the evidence did not establish that the defendants had failed to dedicate proper time and attention to their work for the first claimant. Accordingly, the claimant was not entitled to salary payments received by the defendants from the claimant or Vox.

If you are not a subscriber, subscribe now to read this content
If you are already a subscriber sign in
...or Register for two weeks' free access to subscriber content

MOVERS & SHAKERS

mfg Solicitors—Hannah Finnegan

mfg Solicitors—Hannah Finnegan

Law firm strengthens private client team to support continued growth

Devonshires—Andrew Cromb

Devonshires—Andrew Cromb

Devonshires expands offering with appointment of tax partner Andrew Cromb

Freeths—John Jones

Freeths—John Jones

Freeths strengthens senior leadership team with Chief Technology Officer appointment

NEWS
Mr Justice Nicklin’s decision to order costs on an indemnity basis may be a ‘significant win’ but it’s still ‘far from game, set and match’ for Associated Newspapers, a former costs judge has said
The Law Society RFC Festival of Sport returns next month, bringing together legal and financial services professionals for one of the sector’s largest annual sporting events
Legal aid deserts leave almost one in four without adequate access to justice
The Solicitors Regulation Authority (SRA) has warned solicitors and law firms that using artificial intelligence does not alter their professional obligations, amid concerns over inaccurate legal material and client confidentiality
From forgotten interest claims to case-management appeals, a string of procedural developments offers useful—and occasionally cautionary—lessons for practitioners
back-to-top-scroll