English High Court denies injunction in Chinese wall dispute
The English High Court has denied a glassware maker’s request for an injunction, which would restrain an IP firm from representing the company’s competitors in litigation.
In a ruling on Friday, July 5, presiding judge Richard Hacon said he should not restrain IP boutique Virtuoso from acting as solicitors for a group of defendants, collectively named Final Touch.
The judgment comes after Glencairn Crystal, and its sister company Glencairn IP brought litigation in September 2018 against a competitor, Dartington Crystal, over a whisky glass which it said infringed its IP.
Dartington Crystal was represented by Virtuoso.
Also that month, Glencain sued a Canadian glassware maker, a party of Final Touch, over another glass.
Shortly after, Glencairn and Dartington agreed to attempt to settle their differences. In December 2018, both parties exchanged confidential position statements before settling the dispute on January 8.
At the time, Virtuoso implemented a Chinese wall, after taking the view that it would not be appropriate for their Dartington team to be involved in the ongoing Final Touch litigation.
But, Glencairn disputed that the Chinese wall at Virtuoso was adequate.
It raised concerns that Virtuoso had acquired confidential information disclosed during the Dartington mediation, including Glencairn’s negotiating position and the terms on which it was prepared to settle.
It argued that there is a risk that this information will become known to Final Touch via Virtuoso and provide Final Touch with an advantage in the proceedings, particularly in settlement negotiations.
While Hacon assumed that the Dartington team at Virtuoso is aware of “at least some” of Glencairn’s confidential information, the risk of the information being shared is low.
“I believe that to be very unlikely, to the point of being fanciful,” he said.
Although Hacon agreed with Glencairn that there is a “greater risk of inadvertent disclosure in a small firm”, he said this did not mean that a disclosure barrier in a small firm can never be effective.
Additionally, he said that although there is regular contact between the Final touch and Dartington teams at Virtuoso, it is likely that all individuals are highly aware that nothing should be said about the Dartington litigation.
“I am satisfied that the likelihood that any confidential part of the settlement agreement will become known to any of the Final Touch team is very low,” he said.
Did you enjoy reading this story? Sign up to our free daily newsletters and get stories like this sent straight to your inbox.
Today's top stories:
EasyJet owner wins TM invalidation at UKIPO
Event report: UK should enact ‘imperfect’ copyright directive
