![Case Nos: IP-2023-000039 and IP-2023-000132 - [2024] EWHC 2889 (IPEC)](https://backend.juristeca.com/files/emisores/logo_AacSvIO.png){kind=logo}
Intellectual Property Enterprise Court
Case Nos: IP-2023-000039 and IP-2023-000132 - [2024] EWHC 2889 (IPEC)
Fecha: 15-Nov-2024
Conclusions
Conclusion
For all the foregoing reasons, I am satisfied that both Currentbody’s and Kaiyan’s cases based on alleged breach of the NDA carry some degree of conviction. The saving in time at the trial if they were not considered may be less than at first appears, though that is secondary. The applications to strike out and for summary judgment are dismissed.
- Heading
- Background
- The claims
- The Kaiyan Claim
- Order of 18 January 2024
- Strike out / Summary judgment
- The law
- Contractual interpretation
- The NDA
- ISD’s grounds for summary judgment in the ISD Claim
- The Contracts (Rights of Third Parties) Act 1999
- The expiry of the NDA
- Construction of clause 3(1)
- Currentbody’s arguments in the ISD Claim
- The purpose of clause 2(5)
- Generally known
- Discussion
- The arguments in the Kaiyan Claim
- Discussion
- Conclusions