Confidentiality

Front 1

What is the action surrounding confidentiality?

Back 1

Common law breach of confidence

Front 2

Which case established the 3 elements of a breach of confidence action?

Back 2

Coco v Clark (1969)

Front 3

What are the 3 elements for a breach of confidence action?

Back 3

1) the information must be confidential/ have a necessary quality of confidence about it.

2) The information must have been imparted in circumstances where the confident knew or ought reasonably to have known that the information was confidential.

3)There must be unauthorized use of the information.

Front 4

Which 2 cases state that the confidential information must be readily identifiable so that he scope of any injunction is certain?

Back 4

Suhner v Transradio [1967]

Ocular Sciences [1997]

Front 5

Which case states that some skill or labour must be expended in producing the information for it to be confidential?

Back 5

Schering Chemicals v Falkman [1982]

Front 6

Which case states that information must be novel to be confidential?

Back 6

Coulthard v Discomix [1999]

Front 7

Which case states that oral information can qualify for protection? The information does not necessarily have to be written down.

Back 7

Fraser v Thames TV Ltd [1983]

Front 8

Which case sets out 4 limitations on the type of material that can be protected? and what are they?

Back 8

Ocular Sciences [1999]
1)Trivial; 2) Immoral; 3) Vague; and 4) Information in the public domain.

Front 9

What was stated in Mills v MGN [2001]?

Back 9

The address of Heather Mills was protectable despite the 'relatively trivial nature of the information.'

Front 10

Which case suggests that the courts are reluctant to categorize certain behaviour as immoral?

Back 10

Stephens v Avery [1988]

Front 11

In which case were all 5 of the claimant's idea 'individually too vague' and therefore not capable of protection?

Back 11

De Maudsley v Palumbo [1996]

Front 12

Which case states that information will be in the public domain if it is 'well-known' to that section of the public who have an interest in knowing that information?

Back 12

Ryan v Capital Leasing (1993)

Front 13

Which case identifies the idea of 'relative secrecy'- information can still be confidential if a small number of people know about it?

Back 13

Prince Albert v Strange [1849]

Front 14

Which case suggests that disclosure of a certain part of the information did not deprive the rest of the information of its quality of confidence?

Back 14

Douglas v Hello! [2001]

Front 15

What is the 'springboard doctrine?'

Back 15

A doctrine which aims to ensure that a person who breaches a duty of confidence is not able to benefit from the breach- the idea is to prevent them getting a head start without paying for it.

Front 16

Which case sets out the springboard doctrine?

Back 16

Terrapin v Builder's Supply Co [1967]

Front 17

Which case states that the springboard doctrine does not last forever.

Back 17

Potters Ballotini v Weston Baker [1977]

Front 18

Which case states that encrypted information is incapable of being protected if it has been published?

Back 18

Mars v Teknowledge [2000]

Front 19

Which case states that a document can be confidential if it is the result of work done by the maker on materials which may be in the public domain- the use of his brain makes it confidential.

Back 19

Saltman Engineering (1948)

Front 20

Which case state that 'private information' may be protectable if the claimant had a 'reasonable expectation of privacy.'

Back 20

Campbell v Mirror News Group [2004]

Front 21

Which case sets out the factors to be taken into account when assessing whether the claimant had a reasonable expectation of privacy? What are these factors?

Back 21

Murray v Express Newspapers [2008] (JK Rowling case)

-attributes of claimant (adult/child)
-nature of the activity engaged in
-location of claimant
-nature and purpose of intrusion
-effect on claimant
-whether the observer was aware of absense of consent etc

Front 22

Which case states that a defendant must be under a legal rather than merely moral obligation of confidence?

Back 22

AG v Jonathan Cape [1976]

Front 23

What are the 4 situations in which an obligation of confidence may arise?

Back 23

1) contractual relationship
2) fiduciary/ equaitable relationship
3) from the manner of communication
4) where there is no relationship

Front 24

Which case displays a breach of a contractual obligation not to disclose to a third party?

Back 24

Exchange Telegraph v Gregory [1896]

Front 25

Which case is an example of an implied contractual term not to disclose?

Back 25

Tournier v National Provincial and Union Bank of England [1924]

Front 26

Which case states that there is an implied duty of confidence on all employees to keep information secret?

Back 26

Hivac v Park Royal Scientific Instruments [1946]

Front 27

Which case states that an employee must act in good faith, and may not act for their own benefit/ that of a 3rd party without the informed consent of the employer?

Back 27

AG v Blake

Front 28

Which case states that employees are under an imposed duty of fidelity to their employers?

Back 28

Robb v Green

Front 29

Which case sets out three categories of information regarding employees?

Back 29

Faccenda Chicken v Fowler [1987]

Front 30

What are the 3 categories set out in Faccenda?

Back 30

1) Info which is trivial and not confidential

2) Info which is confidential whilst the defendant is an employee

3) Trade secrets

In the case the information fell in the middle category and an obligation of confidence was not owed after employment.

Front 31

What were the 5 factors looked at in Faccenda Chicken?

Back 31

1) nature of employment
2) nature of information
3) whether the employer ever impressed the confidentiality of the information on the employee
4) whether confidential information could easily be isolated from non-confidential information
5) whether there would be any significant harm if the information was disclosed

Front 32

What were the facts of FSS Travel and Leisure v Johnson [1999]?

Back 32

a restrictive covenant said that the defendant could not work in the field of computer programming for 1 year.
The court held that the subject matter in question was 'know-how' rather than a trade secret so the covenant was TOO RESTRICTIVE.

Front 33

What happened in Mont v Mills [1993]

Back 33

a restrictive covenant on the paper industry worldwide for 1 year was too long, and too broad in both subject matter and geographical scope to be enforceable.

Front 34

What is 'Garden Leave?'

Back 34

a period of paid time after employment in which an ex-employee cannot work for a rival firm

Front 35

Which case states that a mere equitable relationship can give rise to a duty of confidence?

Back 35

Coco v Clark (1969)

Front 36

What is the usual test for whether the manner of communication gives rise to a duty of confidence? What case is this set out in?

Back 36

an OBJECTIVE test- whether the defendant should have realised that the information was supposed to have been kept confidential.
Ackroyds v Islington Plastics Ltd [1962]

Front 37

Which case states that, in some circumstances where there is a strong equitable obligation, a subjective approach may possibly be taken to determining whether an obligation of confidence arose?

Back 37

Carflow Products v Linwood Securities

Front 38

Which case states that an indirect recipient of confidential information who is aware that the information is confidential will be under an obligation?

Back 38

AG v Guardian (Spycatcher)

Front 39

Which case states that if a person receives information innocently but later discovers its confidential nature, they will be under an obligation of confidence?

Back 39

English & American v Herbert Smith [1988]

Front 40

Which case suggests that a stranger can be under a duty of confidence if they should have known the information to be confidential in the the context of private information?

Back 40

Douglas v Hello! [2001]

Front 41

In which case was an obligation imposed because the signs should have made the defendant realise that he could not take photographs?

Back 41

Shelley films v Rex feature [1994]

Front 42

What was stated in A v B ?

Back 42

Any interference with freedom of the press must be justified, irrespective of whether the information is in the public interest.
In this case, the degree of confidentiality to which the claimant was entitled was very modest, and an injunction would be an unjustified interference with the freedom of the press.

Front 43

which case suggests that if a patent has been granted the information will be in the public domain but will not be if it is only in the application stage?

Back 43

franchi v franchi