+44 207 488 9947
In the recent case of Raks Holdings AS v. TTPCom Limited, a dispute arose between the parties in relation to a commercial collaboration. The nature of the collaboration was for the development of a mobile phone handset with a built in camera. In accordance with the agreement between the parties, the defendant, TTPCom Limited, developed the appropriate software and licensed it to the claimant, Raks Holdings.
Amongst other things, the agreement prohibited the defendant from using certain identical features of the handsets with other customers. The claimant later discovered a handset possessing what they believed to be identical features to those stated in their agreement. The claimant sought an interim injunction to restrain the defendant company from using the confidential information seeking damages and an account of profits from the sale of the product
The defendant entered a defence in relation to using confidential information, and on analysis of the facts, the application for the injunction was dismissed. The court reasoned that the injunction sought by the claimant was "insufficiently specific" in relation to the confidential information.
There was great uncertainty as to what amounted to confidential information, and what was already in the public domain. Furthermore, the court interpreted the claimant's delay in bringing their claim for an interim injunction as a lack of fear on the claimant's part of suffering severe damage, as the claimant waited a few months before initiating proceedings.
Note: In order to succeed in bringing an interim injunction, a claimant has to act swiftly after the breach has occurred.
Email: Dr Rosanna Cooper
© RT COOPERS, 2004. This Briefing Note does not provide a comprehensive or complete statement of the law relating to the issues discussed nor does it constitute legal advice. It is intended only to highlight general issues. Specialist legal advice should always be sought in relation to particular circumstances.