Source: All England Reporter
Publisher Citation: [2013] All ER (D) 61 (Mar)
Neutral Citation: [2013] EWCA Civ 176
Court: Court of Appeal, Civil Division
Judge:

Arden, Jackson and Beatson LJJ

Representation Martin Hutchings QC (instructed by IBB Solicitors) for the claimant.
  Jamie Smith (instructed by Mayer Brown International LLP) for the defendant.
Judgment Dates: 7 March 2013

Catchwords

Confidential information - Disclosure - Prevention of disclosure - Claimant seeking finance for purchase and development of site - Defendant identifying third party funder - Claimant and defendant entering into deed providing for non-circumvention and non-disclosure of confidential information - Deed requiring defendant to obtain back-to-back deed with any third party - Claimant and defendant providing information to third party in belief bound by deed - Third party making successful sole bid - Claimant commencing proceedings for breach of deed - Court determining preliminary issues - Judge finding defendant not being required to obtain deed of non-circumvention and non-disclosure from third party - Judge finding any back-to-back agreement not covering disclosure by claimant to third party - Claimant appealing - Whether judge erring.

The Case

Confidential information Disclosure. The Court of Appeal, Civil Division, held that the terms of a non-disclosure and non-circumvention deed had required the defendant to obtain a back-to-back agreement with any third party to which it disclosed confidential information, and, had a back-to-back agreement been made, it would have prohibited that third party from non-disclosure and non-circumvention in terms similar to those imposed on the defendant under the original deed.

Practice Areas

If you are a LexisLibrary subscriber you can read more about this case here.