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

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


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.