[2025] EWHC 1160 (TCC)

What is plain from the chronology set out above is that irrespective of the true contractual position, both sides will in fact part company. Although the injunction sought is until trial or further order, the reality is that EE wants Avanti to keep providing the services until such time as the replacement supplier for EE is operational. For its part, Avanti does not wish to lose the opportunity afforded by the LOI in the meantime.

At the conclusion of the hearing, and given that the central issue for any trial would be the correct contractual position in respect of Avanti’s obligation or otherwise to keep on providing its services to EE, which is a matter of construction, I invited the parties to agree to an expedited trial lasting 2 or 3 days. I could offer such a trial in the week commencing 7 July 2025 if there were appropriate undertakings from Avanti in the meantime. Avanti was prepared to agree to this, but EE was not, because it considered it would need more than 2 months to prepare for such a trial and also because its present Leading Counsel would not be available. Given that disagreement, this present judgment is given.