Dellner Woodville Ltd v Blackham [2012] EWHC 1739 (QB) (13 January 2012)

Dellner Woodville Ltd v Blackham [2012] EWHC 1739 (QB) (13 January 2012)

There are no exceptional circumstances in this case to justify an order requiring the respondent to provide a sworn affidavit detailing use or disclosure of company documents. The jurisdiction to make such orders is exceptional and not to be exercised routinely. The claimant has not produced evidence of misuse, and it is not appropriate for the court to require the respondent to provide evidence of wrongdoing not already discovered by the claimant.

Citation
[2012] EWHC 1739 (QB)
Parties
Applicant/claimant: Dellner Woodville Limited; Respondent/defendant: John Blackham
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
13 January 2012
Procedural Posture
Interim Injunction Application / Hearing of Application for Interim Relief
Outcome
Application granted in part; disputed relief refused.
Legal Topics
Interim Injunctions, Employee Confidentiality, Return of Company Property, Disclosure Obligations
Employment Law Confidential Information Civil Procedure Interim Injunctions Employee Confidentiality Return of Company Property Disclosure Obligations

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 2 Authorities cited 1 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Dellner Woodville Limited

Applicant/claimant

John Blackham

Respondent/defendant

Procedural Posture

Interim Injunction Application / Hearing of Application for Interim Relief

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the respondent should be ordered to provide a sworn affidavit detailing use or disclosure of company documents and confidential information
  2. 2 Whether exceptional circumstances exist to justify an order requiring the respondent to provide evidence of wrongdoing not already obtained by the claimant

Ratio Decidendi

There are no exceptional circumstances in this case to justify an order requiring the respondent to provide a sworn affidavit detailing use or disclosure of company documents. The jurisdiction to make such orders is exceptional and not to be exercised routinely. The claimant has not produced evidence of misuse, and it is not appropriate for the court to require the respondent to provide evidence of wrongdoing not already discovered by the claimant.

Court Disposition

Application granted in part; disputed relief refused.

Orders

  • Respondent to deliver up to the applicant's solicitors any property of the claimant in his possession or control by 4.30pm on 17 January 2012.
  • If such property exists only in computer readable form, respondent to print out or copy onto an electronic storage medium and deliver to applicant's solicitors by 4.30pm on 17 January 2012.