Fortescue Metals Group Ltd & Anor v Argus Media Limited & Anor [2020] EWHC 1333 (Ch) (22 May 2020)

Fortescue Metals Group Ltd & Anor v Argus Media Limited & Anor [2020] EWHC 1333 (Ch) (22 May 2020)

The application for an interim injunction was dismissed because the court, applying s.12 HRA, found no sufficient basis for restraint, and the balancing exercise did not favour the Claimants. The Defendants were entitled to costs as the application was a discrete matter and not part of the trial.

Citation
[2020] EWHC 1333 (Ch)
Parties
Claimant: Fortescue Metals Group Ltd; Claimant: Chichester Metals Pty Ltd; Defendant: Argus Media Limited; Defendant: S&P Global Inc.
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
22 May 2020
Procedural Posture
Interim Injunction Application / Post Judgment, Costs and Permission to Appeal
Outcome
Claimants' application for injunction dismissed; permission to appeal refused.
Legal Topics
Interim Injunctions, Breach of Confidence, Article 10 ECHR, Costs, Permission to Appeal
Civil Procedure Media Law Human Rights Interim Injunctions Breach of Confidence Article 10 ECHR Costs Permission to Appeal

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 4 Authorities cited 4 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Fortescue Metals Group Ltd

Claimant

Chichester Metals Pty Ltd

Claimant

Argus Media Limited

Defendant

S&P Global Inc.

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Interim Injunction Application / Post Judgment, Costs and Permission to Appeal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether an interim injunction should be granted to restrain disclosure of confidential information
  2. 2 Assessment of public interest defence under s.12 HRA
  3. 3 Impact of disclosure of pricing information on competition

Ratio Decidendi

The application for an interim injunction was dismissed because the court, applying s.12 HRA, found no sufficient basis for restraint, and the balancing exercise did not favour the Claimants. The Defendants were entitled to costs as the application was a discrete matter and not part of the trial.

Court Disposition

Claimants' application for injunction dismissed; permission to appeal refused.

Orders

  • Defendants awarded all costs of the application, to be assessed on the standard basis if not agreed.
  • Interim payment ordered: £80,000 to First Defendant, £140,000 to Second Defendant.