Case Nos: IP-2023-000039 and IP-2023-000132 - [2024] EWHC 2889 (IPEC)
Fecha: 15-Nov-2024
Generally known
Generally known
Currentbody submitted that on a correct construction of ‘generally known’, the lifting of the obligations of confidentiality allowed for by clause 3(1) did not operate until after the acts in breach of clause 2(5) were done. Currentbody said that for information to become ‘generally known’ within the meaning of clause 3(1) it requires more than one disclosure, e.g. to the UKIPO. It is a question of fact and degree which will require evidence at trial.
ISD said at the hearing that on any view the information had become generally known by 2020 because the designs were published in Vogue UK and Hello magazines.
Currentbody complained that these publications were raised for the first time in evidence less than 3 days before the hearing in breach of CPR 24.5(3)(b).
- 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