Please sign in with your existing account details.
Register to access exclusive content, sign up to receive our updates and personalise your experience on brownejacobson.com.
Privacy statement - Terms and conditions
Forgotten your password?
You have exceeded the maximum number of login attempts for this email address and your account has been locked. An email has been sent to member of Browne Jacobson's web team and some one will be contacting you over the next two working days with details of how to change your password.
Are you sure you want to remove this item from you pinned content?
In the recent case of Volkswagen Aktiengesellschaft and Thales v Garcia and others, Thales, who makes car security systems, provided such a system to Volkswagen. Academic experts in the field of coding and decoding information intended to publish findings on a weakness identified in a software algorithm that had been devised by Thales. The defendants argued, amongst other things, that there was a strong public interest in exposing security flaws and that the algorithm was not confidential information as it was contained within free software.
However, the claimants were successful in having the academic text appropriately redacted. The risk of putting a new method of stealing cars in the public domain was deemed to justify quashing the academics’ freedom of speech, combined with the fact that the algorithm was found to constitute confidential information.
This case highlights the importance of carefully establishing whether or not information is confidential before proceeding to work with it and then attempting to put it in the public domain.
On 14 January 2019 a Capped Costs Pilot Scheme was introduced in the Leeds and Manchester Business and Property Courts, and has been set to run for two years.
View blog
In a lengthy majority judgment accompanied by two powerful dissenting opinions, the Supreme Court found yesterday that land acquired and held for statutory purposes cannot be registered as a village green where that registration is incompatible with the statutory purpose for which it is held.
The decision of the Supreme Court extends the scope of whistle-blower protection and is a wider approach than that taken in direct discrimination claims.
An 89 year old former patient pathway co-ordinator has been awarded £200,000 by an Employment Tribunal for unfair dismissal and age and disability discrimination following her dismissal on capability grounds.
Select which mailings you would like to receive from us.
Sign up