||All England Reporter
|| All ER (D) 243 (Jan)
|| EWHC 94 (Comm)
||Queen's Bench Division, Commercial Court
||Daniel Jowell QC and Richard Eschwege (instructed by Enyo Law LLP) for the claimants.
||Bankim Thanki QC and Tamara Oppenheimer (instructed by Olswang LLP) for the defendants.
||31 January 2014
Solicitor - Duty - Duty of confidentiality to client - Claimants seeking permanent injunction to restrain defendant solicitors' firms from acting for, or advising, client - Claimants contending defendants previously acting for them and having confidential information - Whether defendants should be restrained from acting for client.
Solicitor Duty. The claimants sought to restrain the defendant solicitors' firms acting for their client, P, in Commercial Court proceedings. They contended that the defendants had previously acted for them and had had access to confidential information. The Commercial Court, in granting the application, held that the claimants' interests were adversely affected by the defendants continuing to act for P and that there was a real risk that those involved in P's action had had possession of confidential information, which had been used or would be used in the Commercial Court action.
- An Official transcript is the final version of the judgment prepared by shorthand writers. LexisLibrary contains all judgments from the High Court and aboveView Judgment
- Commentary discussing this particular case from LexisLibrary's comprehensive range of titles including Butterworths, Halsbury's and TolleyView related commentary
- The All England Law Reports comprises judgments with headnotes and catchwords indicating the area of law and key issues of the case prepared by legally qualified editorsFind AllER Reports
- Cases related to this particular case that are related to, or discuss this caseView related cases