Braunford LLP & Anor v Pierre Allain

Braunford LLP & Anor v Pierre Allain

The court refused the defendant's application for extended disclosure on issues relating to trading strategy development stages and team contributions to 'Humber', finding them irrelevant, duplicative, or disproportionate in light of agreed disclosure on value. The court refused permission for expert evidence on four of the five proposed topics, holding they are questions of fact or not reasonably required. Permission was granted for a single joint expert on the practical utility of confidential information, reformulated as whether the information copied by the defendant would assist a hypothetical competitor in developing or duplicating a trading strategy, as this would materially assist...

Parties
Claimant: Braunford LLP; Claimant: Corbiere Limited; Defendant: Pierre Allain
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
10 July 2025
Procedural Posture
Civil Intellectual Property / Employment / Case Management Hearing; Determination of Disclosure and Expert Evidence Applications
Outcome
Defendant's applications for extended disclosure on issues 4 and 8 refused; permission for expert evidence refused on topics 1-4; permission granted for single joint expert on topic 5 (practical utility of confidential information, as reformulated).
Legal Topics
Confidential Information, Trade Secrets, Disclosure, Expert Evidence, Injunctive Relief, Copyright Infringement
Employment Law Intellectual Property Law Civil Procedure Confidential Information Trade Secrets Disclosure Expert Evidence Injunctive Relief +1 more

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

Parties

Braunford LLP

Claimant

Corbiere Limited

Claimant

Pierre Allain

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil Intellectual Property / Employment / Case Management Hearing; Determination of Disclosure and Expert Evidence Applications

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the defendant is entitled to extended disclosure on issues relating to trading strategy development stages and team contributions to 'Humber'.
  2. 2 Whether the defendant should have permission to adduce expert evidence on quantitative or algorithmic trading strategies, specifically on five identified topics.

Ratio Decidendi

The court refused the defendant's application for extended disclosure on issues relating to trading strategy development stages and team contributions to 'Humber', finding them irrelevant, duplicative, or disproportionate in light of agreed disclosure on value. The court refused permission for expert evidence on four of the five proposed topics, holding they are questions of fact or not reasonably required. Permission was granted for a single joint expert on the practical utility of confidential information, reformulated as whether the information copied by the defendant would assist a hypothetical competitor in developing or duplicating a trading strategy, as this would materially assist...

Court Disposition

Defendant's applications for extended disclosure on issues 4 and 8 refused; permission for expert evidence refused on topics 1-4; permission granted for single joint expert on topic 5 (practical utility of confidential information, as reformulated).

Orders

  • Disclosure review document to require all defendant’s email accounts to be searched for non-privileged, disclosable documents.
  • Parties to agree and file for court approval the terms of an order giving effect to this judgment, including directions for the single joint expert on practical utility of confidential information.