Daniella Gilbert

Daniella undertakes a broad spectrum of commercial litigation, associated commercial chancery disputes, civil fraud and company law. She has particular experience in:

• Commercial contract disputes
• Employment related commercial disputes including restrictive covenants
• Applications for interim remedies including freezing orders
• Business protection and confidentiality
• Share purchase disputes
• Shareholder disputes and directors’ duties

Selected Cases

Countrywide Group Plc v Moeller

Led by Richard Wilson QC. Claim arising out of the failure to complete share purchase, value of over £10 million.

GL Technology Co Ltd & Loadpoint Bearings Ltd v Parkes

Defended claim against former director and shareholder in claim of breach of restrictive covenants and misuse of confidential information.

Verismart Ltd v Fuller and others

Application for pre-action disclosure in relation to dispute against former franchisees and their associated companies for breach of restrictive covenants.

Prestige Developments (Park Homes) Ltd v Bedford

Acted for the defendant / appellant in her successful High Court appeal against the lower court’s finding that the claim had not been compromised by the claimant’s acceptance of a part 36 offer.

Bea's Homes Ltd v Mediratta

Breach of contract claim for failure to complete a property purchase.

Norsand Consultancy Limited v Volta Investment Group Limited

Acted for defendants in claims of breach of contract, unlawful means conspiracy / unlawful interference with contractual relations and breach of the Insolvency Act 1986.

Law Firm Ltd & Law Firm UK Ltd v Shemarin & others

Acted for the defendants in claims alleging breach of contract, misuse of confidential information, interference with contractual relations and conspiracy to injure by lawful and unlawful means.

Oakfield Foods Ltd v Zaklad Przemyslu Miesnego Biernacki SP [2020] EWHC 250 (QB) and [2020] EWHC 493 (QB)

Daniella acted for the respondent company (Z) who obtained a European Order for Payment against the applicant (O). O argued that the EOP was unenforceable and should be set aside because it had served an Annex II declaration refusing service. Daniella successfully argued that the Annex II declaration had not been properly served and the EOP was valid. The Court refused O’s applications for a declaration and to set aside the EOP. Enforcement was stayed. O is currently seeking permission to appeal.

Zaman v Portsmouth City Council [2018] EWHC 3592 (QB); [2018] 12 WLUK 451

Appeal on whether the claimant was required to sign a form of authority before the council was obliged to release funds to him. Judge at first instance found the claimant was required to sign the form, so the claim was dismissed. That was upheld on appeal. Daniella successfully represented the respondent.

SH v G [2017]

Daniella represented the Defendant to a High Court claim for breach of contract, breach of fiduciary duty and breach of restrictive covenants. The claim arose following fraud committed by an estate agent against his previous employers.

Samambwa v Countrywide Managing / Residential Ltd & Others [2012] EWCA Civ 1133

Daniella acted for the second respondent (“HS”) at first instance, on appeal to the Court of Appeal and at the subsequent retrial. The claimant (“S”) initially claimed for breach of contract, wrongful interference with goods and negligence. At first instance HS successfully defended the claims, in particular it was held they were not vicariously liable for the acts of their contractors. S’s appeal was allowed on the basis that the trial judge had failed to fully determine his claim in negligence, on the issue of notice. The matter was sent back for retrial on this issue only. At the retrial in 2014 Daniella again successfully represented HS and S’s claim was dismissed.

Crompton v Woodford Scrap Metal Ltd [2014] EWHC 1260 (QB)

Application for possession of a scrapyard and injunction to prevent defendant from entering or remaining on the land.

Glenbrook Capital LP v Hamilton (t/a Hamiltons) [2014] EWHC 2297 (Comm)

Assessment of damages for wrongful interference with goods (large quantities of silver) following judgment in default against the defendant.