Gus Consulting GmbH v Leboeuf Lamb Greene & Macrae [2005] EWHC 2527 (Comm) (21 October 2005)

Gus Consulting GmbH v Leboeuf Lamb Greene & Macrae [2005] EWHC 2527 (Comm) (21 October 2005)

CAIB established that Leboeuf possessed confidential information relevant to the arbitration. However, Leboeuf, by implementing an ethical wall, offering enforceable undertakings to the court, and providing credible evidence that the arbitration team had no access to CAIB's confidential information, succeeded in showing that the risk of disclosure was theoretical rather than real. Therefore, the threshold for injunctive relief was not met.

Citation
[2005] EWHC 2527 (Comm)
Parties
Claimant: GUS Consulting GMBH; Defendant: Leboeuf Lamb Greene & Macrae
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
21 October 2005
Procedural Posture
Application for Injunction Under Section 44 of the Arbitration Act 1996 / Substantive Hearing of Application
Outcome
Application for injunction refused, subject to the court's satisfaction with the detail of undertakings offered by Leboeuf.
Legal Topics
Injunctions, Breach of Confidence, Former Client Confidentiality, Ethical Walls, Solicitor Client Privilege
Arbitration Legal Ethics Confidentiality Injunctions Breach of Confidence Former Client Confidentiality Ethical Walls Solicitor Client Privilege

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 5 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

GUS Consulting GMBH

Claimant

Leboeuf Lamb Greene & Macrae

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Application for Injunction Under Section 44 of the Arbitration Act 1996 / Substantive Hearing of Application

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether Leboeuf possesses confidential information relevant to the arbitration and to which CAIB has not consented to disclosure or use
  2. 2 Whether Leboeuf has shown that there is no real risk of disclosure of CAIB's confidential information

Ratio Decidendi

CAIB established that Leboeuf possessed confidential information relevant to the arbitration. However, Leboeuf, by implementing an ethical wall, offering enforceable undertakings to the court, and providing credible evidence that the arbitration team had no access to CAIB's confidential information, succeeded in showing that the risk of disclosure was theoretical rather than real. Therefore, the threshold for injunctive relief was not met.

Court Disposition

Application for injunction refused, subject to the court's satisfaction with the detail of undertakings offered by Leboeuf.

Orders

  • No injunction granted against Leboeuf, provided undertakings are given to the court as specified.