Gaining confidence in the law of confidence

Legal context. The recent case of EPI v Symphony has left theUK law of confidentiality in an uncertain state: the extentto which recipients of confidential information may be permittedto ‘use’ mixtures of such information with publiclyavailable material remains unclear. The Court of Appeal in EPIfelt that it was hard to reconcile the principle that any claimin confidence must fail if the material in question is in thepublic domain with the ‘springboard’ doctrine; butis the distinction illusory? Key points. Issues raised in this case include considerationof what precisely is ‘use’ of confidential information,when mixed with public information, and whether a confider shoulddo more than rely on confidentiality obligations to protectthe fruits of his/her disclosures. This article asks how confidentialityobligations may be aligned with the control of statutory intellectualproperty rights. It considers whether the Court of Appeal inMarkem v Zipher has confused the issue and speculates as tohow far the general law of contract can assist the confider. Practical significance. Finally, this article discusses whichlegal tools will best assist the confider seeking to protectits intellectual property.     

Patent procedure in England and Wales: the Streamlined Procedure meets resistance

The proposition by the English High Court in 2005 that the StreamlinedProcedure for dealing with patent actions should apply wheneverraised by a party to an action in the absence of convincingreasons to the contrary has been rejected by the Court of Appeal.     

Res judicata in patent actions: is the law too entrenched?

The Court of Appeal rules that a patentee's entitlement to financialcompensation following the final determination by a UK courtthat its patent is both valid and infringed cannot be underminedby the subsequent revocation of that patent in opposition proceedingsin the EPO.