The claimant was an insurance broking company involved in insuring aviation risks with an international presence. It was one of the four main companies in that market, together with the first defendant and other such companies. It was common ground that 16 of the claimant's employees resigned from the claimant's employ and moved to the first defendant. The claimant brought proceedings against the defendants, alleging that the first defendant had carried out what was commonly called a 'team poaching' exercise and had procured the resignations of 16 of its staff, all experienced and all valued with established contact with clients and confidential information which belonged to the claimant. It further alleged that that was a concerted action and was the result of the first defendant procuring the services of those staff in breach of their contracts of employment. The claimant made a without notice application for relief and received an order accordingly. The defendants contended that the order should be di scharged in its entirety. The Court ruled that the order be discharged as all that had been shown was a good arguable case, no more and no less. The order was far wider than anything in any other case discussed and was the very antithesis of the focused and proportionate approach that might have made such an application more palatable.

Court: High Court (Queen's Bench Division) (England and Wales)

AON Ltd v JLT Reinsurance Brokers Ltd and others (QB) (14 January 2010)

Full judgement here...