Scentrics Information Security Technologies Ltd v Adam [2017] EWHC 3796 (Ch) (30 August 2017)

Scentrics Information Security Technologies Ltd v Adam [2017] EWHC 3796 (Ch) (30 August 2017)

The court held that Scentrics had retained the equipment for longer than was reasonably practicable, and that Miss Adam's interests required prompt return of her property. The order was varied to impose strict deadlines for imaging, deletion, and return of equipment, and made conditional on payment of £2,000 to Miss Adam on account of compensation for deprivation of her computers.

Citation
[2017] EWHC 3796 (Ch)
Parties
Claimant: Scentrics Information Security Technologies Ltd; Defendant: Marlena Adam
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
30 August 2017
Procedural Posture
Interim Application in Civil Proceedings / Application for Variation of Injunction/order for Return of Property
Outcome
Order varied; equipment to be returned to Miss Adam by specified deadlines; payment of £2,000 to Miss Adam as condition of order.
Legal Topics
Injunctions, Confidential Information, Return of Property, Cross Undertaking in Damages
Civil Procedure Intellectual Property Employment Injunctions Confidential Information Return of Property Cross Undertaking in Damages

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 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Scentrics Information Security Technologies Ltd

Claimant

Marlena Adam

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Interim Application in Civil Proceedings / Application for Variation of Injunction/order for Return of Property

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether Scentrics should be required to return computer equipment to Miss Adam
  2. 2 Whether Scentrics has retained the equipment for longer than reasonably practicable under the order of 5 August 2016
  3. 3 Whether compensation should be paid to Miss Adam for deprivation of her equipment

Ratio Decidendi

The court held that Scentrics had retained the equipment for longer than was reasonably practicable, and that Miss Adam's interests required prompt return of her property. The order was varied to impose strict deadlines for imaging, deletion, and return of equipment, and made conditional on payment of £2,000 to Miss Adam on account of compensation for deprivation of her computers.

Court Disposition

Order varied; equipment to be returned to Miss Adam by specified deadlines; payment of £2,000 to Miss Adam as condition of order.

Orders

  • IT experts to mirror and delete information on backup hard drive first and return it forthwith upon completion.
  • IT experts to provide a narrative report of all dealings with the external hard drive.