Lansing Linde v Kerr [1991]

In Lansing Linde Ltd v Kerr [1991] IRLR 80 CA, the Court of Appeal ruled on an employer's application for an interim injunction to prevent a former employee from working for a competitor in violation of a restrictive covenant. The court affirmed that the High Court had the discretion to deny the interim injunction due to congestion in the court system, which would result in a full trial taking place after a significant portion of the restrictive covenant period had lapsed.

The employer sought to restrain the former employee from joining a competitor company based on the breach of a restrictive covenant. However, the High Court, considering the delays in the court system, recognised that a full trial could not occur until most of the restriction period had passed. In light of these circumstances, the High Court took into account the plaintiff's prospects of success at the trial when deciding on the interim injunction.

The Court of Appeal upheld the High Court's decision, affirming its entitlement to consider the practical implications of the delay in the legal process. This case underscores the importance of a court's discretion in assessing the appropriateness of interim injunctions, especially when the timing of a full trial may impact the effectiveness of the restrictive covenant.
Back to blog

UOL Case Bank

Upon joining, you become a valuable UOL student and gain instant access to over 2,100 case summaries. UOL Case Bank is constantly expanding. Speed up your revision with us now.

Subscribe Now

Where are our students from?

Yale University
Council of Europe
Baker Mckenzie 
University of Chicago
Columbia University
New York University
University of Michigan 
University College London (UCL)
London School of Economics (LSE)
King’s College London (KCL)
University of London
University of Manchester
University of Zurich
University of York
Brandeis University
University of Exeter
University of Sheffield
Boston University
University of Washington
University of Leeds
University of Law
Royal Holloway, University of London 
Birkbeck, University of London
SOAS, University of London
University of Kent
University of Hull
Queen’s University Belfast
Toronto Metropolitan University
Hong Kong University of Science and Technology
University of Buckingham
ESSEC Business School

  • Criminal Practice

    Diagrams and Charts

    Our carefully designed diagrams and charts will guide you through complex legal issues.

  • Criminal Law

    Clear and Succinct Definitions

    Key concepts are concisely defined to help you understand legal topics quickly.

  • Property Law

    Statutory Provisions

    Statutory provisions are provided side by side with legal concepts to help you swiftly locate the relevant legislation.

  • Public Law

    Case Summaries

    We have summarised important cases for you so that you don't need to read long and boring cases.

  • Evidence

    Rules and Exceptions

    Rules and exceptions are clearly listed so that you know when a rule applies and when it doesn't.

  • Company Law


    Legal terms and key concepts are explained at the beginning of each chapter to help you learn efficiently.

  • Case Law

    Case law is provided side by side with legal concepts so that you know how legal principles and precedents were established.

  • Law Exam Guide

    Law Essay Guide

    You will learn essential law exam skills and essay writing techniques that are not taught in class.

  • Law Exam Guide

    Problem Question Guide

    We will show you how to answer problem questions step by step to achieve first-class results.

  • Conflict of Laws

    Structured Explanations

    Complex legal concepts are broken down into concise and digestible bullet point explanations.

  • Legal System and Method

    Legal Research

    You will learn legal research techniques with our study guide and become a proficient legal researcher.

  • Jurisprudence and Legal Theory


    All essential concepts, principles, and case law are included so that you can answer exam questions quickly.