header-logo header-logo

04 August 2017 / Manus Egan
Issue: 7757 / Categories: Features , Commercial
printer mail-detail

Jackson tribute act tells pier to beat it

Manus Egan looks at the equitable doctrine of laches, in the context of a pier entertainment dispute

  • The doctrine of laches can be a valuable defence against restrictive covenants.

The case of Legends Live v Harrison [2016] EWHC 1938 (QB) concerned an application to enforce a restrictive covenant against a Michael Jackson tribute act in Blackpool. The equitable defence of laches was successfully relied upon, and the meaning of ‘employment business’ considered.

The Legends contract

The claimant company, whose principal business was acting as an employment business, produced a show called Legends at a venue called The Sands in Blackpool. It was a multi-tribute show featuring a number of acts by performers, each appearing in the character of a different famous artist. The defendant was a Michael Jackson tribute performer, who performed under a contract for the summer 2015 season. The contract contained a covenant that the defendant would not compete on any other lookalike or soundalike shows in Blackpool for a period of 12 months from the final date

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

Ogier—Martin Livingston

Ogier—Martin Livingston

Martin Livingston joins Ogier in Cayman to strengthen regulatory support

Blake Morgan—47 promotions

Blake Morgan—47 promotions

Blake Morgan announces 47 summer promotions across UK offices

NEWS
Consultant-led law firms should prepare for closer regulatory attention as oversight evolves
Artificial intelligence may draft workplace grievances, but employers cannot treat them any differently from conventional complaints
From dishonest claimants to judicial promotions and procedural skirmishes, the latest legal developments offer plenty for litigators to digest
Fresh guidance is set to influence how courts decide whether hearings take place online or in person
County Court judges remain divided over whether landlords can lawfully force entry to carry out essential safety inspections after tenants ignore access injunctions
back-to-top-scroll