Search judgments by proposition, citation, court, judge or legal topic, then move directly into the source-grounded case analysis.
Results update automatically as you type.
England and Wales decisions
Decisions matching the current search
Merck KGaA v Merck Sharp & Dohme LLC & Ors [2026] EWHC 1113 (Ch) (15 May 2026)
The court held that MSD remained bound by the confidentiality agreement and could not use the disclosed documents for collateral purposes without a targeted application.
The court granted Merck’s application to keep specified disclosed documents confidential, holding that MSD remained bound by the confidentiality agreement unless it made a targeted application.
The CT Scan Files were referred to at trial within the meaning of CPR 31.22(1)(a), so SG is not restricted from using them in other proceedings. No order should be made under CPR 31.22(2) to prohibit such use, as 3M did not act promptly, any confidentiality as between the parties has been lost, and 3M's concerns do not amount to very good reasons to override the principle of open justice.
Source excerpt
Interdigital Technology Corporation & Ors v Lenovo Group Ltd & Ors [2024] EWHC 742 (Pat) (27 March 2024)
The Patents Court granted Lenovo retrospective permission to use confidential licensing material in related FRAND proceedings, but ordered Lenovo to pay InterDigital’s costs.
Hospira UK Ltd v Genentech, Inc [2014] EWHC 3248 (Pat) (22 July 2014)
The court ruled on whether disclosed patent trial documents should stay confidential under CPR 31.22, balancing open justice against commercial confidentiality.
Dupont Nutrition Biosciences ApS v Novozymes A/S [2013] EWHC 155 (Pat) (07 February 2013)
The court construed an order permitting use of disclosed patent documents abroad, held privilege in the Luna memo had been waived, and refused an injunction.
The Court of Appeal held that Virgin’s lawyers could continue to act in related proceedings despite seeing sensitive disclosed documents, because any misuse risk was fanciful.
Smithkline Beecham Plc v Generics (UK) Ltd. [2003] EWCA Civ 1109 (24 July 2003)
The Court of Appeal addressed whether confidential documents could remain restricted under CPR 31.22 and whether they could be used in related patent proceedings.
Lilly Icos v Pfizer Ltd [2002] EWCA Civ 2 (23 January 2002)
The Court of Appeal held that advertising and promotional expenditure figures in a patent case could remain confidential under CPR 31.22(2) where they played only a limited role at trial.
Lilly Icos Ltd v Pfizer Ltd (2) [2001] EWCA Civ 2 (23rd January, 2001)
Confidentiality may be maintained for documents disclosed in litigation if their role in the trial was limited, the information is axiomatically confidential in the relevant industry, and disclosure is not necessary for public understanding of the case. The 'necessity' test for private hearings does not directly apply to post-trial confidentiality orders under CPR 31.22(2); the court must balance the public interest in open justice with the specific sensitivity and relevance of the document.
Source excerpt
Explore more
