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.
The High Court has rejected the judicial review claim brought by the campaign group BackTo60 against the Department of Work and Pensions (DWP).
View blog
A recent case illustrates the importance of ensuring that all emails discussing the terms of a proposed acquisition are headed ‘subject to contract’.
In its Judgment earlier this month, the Tribunal considered whether vegetarianism is capable of being a philosophical belief capable of protection under the Equality Act 2010.
The recent case of Ugradar v Lancashire Care NHS Foundation Trust has highlighted that the current cap on contractual claims that can be awarded in the Employment Tribunals is outdated and capable of producing real injustice.
Select which mailings you would like to receive from us.
Sign up