[2025] UKUT 308 (AAC)

SoSE submit that the Appellant’s argument that the Slides cannot be considered bespoke teaching materials, designed only for presentation at the School, has no proper evidential basis. The slides are commercial product, not teaching materials, and were in fact reviewed and modified on an ongoing basis. SoSE further argue that, if the Slides were presented to other schools (a limited number of persons), that would not of itself destroy their confidential nature.

SoSE’s skeleton argument says, “it is difficult to overstate the lengths to which [SoSE] went in order to accommodate the Appellant’s request for more information”. The Slides were provided to the School, albeit subject to conditions as to their use and subsequent destruction, and the Appellant took the opportunity to review them in a meeting at the School. The Appellant decided to end that review meeting. She now says that she did so due to concern at being bound by a non-disclosure agreement, but she did not mention this at the time nor seek any clarification.

SoSE offered to meet the Appellant although it appears that this offer was not communicated to her. The significance of this offer is that, had the Appellant not cut short the review meeting and instead asked to see the Slides in a different and more suitable setting, such a request would have been accommodated by SoSE

Ground 3 is that the First-tier Tribunal took into account irrelevant considerations in holding that disclosure of the Slides would cause detriment to SoSE.