The High Court has temporarily restrained a senior Creganna employee from taking up a job with Lake Region Medical while the companies and employee contest the validity of a non-compete clause.
In a judgment delivered on 23 April 2024, Mr Justice Oisín Quinn found that Creganna had raised a serious question to be tried: whether the clause was valid and whether Mr Cullen would breach it by joining Lake Region Medical. He did not decide the clause’s validity at this interlocutory stage.
Creganna sought the injunction, arguing that Mr Cullen’s senior roles gave him access to sensitive commercial information, including pricing, costs, customer programmes and investment plans. It said that knowledge could benefit a competitor and that any resulting loss would be difficult to measure. Mr Cullen disputed aspects of Creganna’s account of his roles and the information he held, while accepting generally that he knew confidential and commercially sensitive information. Both defendants said they did not intend to misuse confidential information.
Mr Cullen and Lake Region Medical argued that the clause was too broad and unenforceable. They also said the job offer could be withdrawn if an injunction were granted. The judge rejected the argument that the clause’s validity should be finally determined on the interlocutory application, citing disputed facts and legal issues that required trial. He also found no substantial delay that justified refusing relief.
The judge considered damages probably inadequate for Creganna if it later established the clause was valid and Mr Cullen had already joined the competitor. He was not persuaded that the evidence clearly showed the job offer would be withdrawn, and considered that damages would probably be adequate for Mr Cullen if the injunction proved wrongly granted. Creganna undertook to continue paying Mr Cullen’s salary until the trial.
The order restrains Mr Cullen from taking up employment with Lake Region Medical until the trial concludes or further order. The court indicated that the trial could begin on 16 July 2024 and directed that steps be taken to prepare the case for that date. The court also provided for liberty to apply if circumstances materially change and said it would hear the parties on costs. The order is interim; the underlying dispute remains to be decided.