Template:Confi injunctions: Difference between revisions

Template:Confi injunctions (view source)

1,111 bytes removed , 14 October 2020

no edit summary

83,229

edits

@@ Line 1: / Line 1: @@
-====[[Injunction]]s and equitable {{confiprov|remedies}}: when [[damages]] ain’t enough====
-Some people like to acknowledge that the potential consequences of [[breach of confidence]] are so severe that ordinary [[contractual damages]] might not be adequate and [[equitable]] relief might be the only means of protecting your position. Equitable relief is the tasty part of the commercial law: [[injunction|Injunctions]], [[dawn raid]]s, [[Anton Piller]] orders and so on. Whatever - ah - floats your boat<ref>See {{Casenote|Anton Piller KG|Manufacturing Processes Limited}}.{{hawf}} </ref>.
-Notionally, this is by way of [[excuse pre-loading]] to gain an acknowledgment so when the poor victim who goes to the [[courts of chancery]] seeking orders for a dawn raid, it can point to M’lud (or at the defendant) and say, “You see, your honour? That rascal knew perfectly well I might need an injunction here.”
-It falls to us to consider when the situation might arise that [[damages are not an adequate remedy]]. Not all that often, in this old buzzard’s opinion.
-====Confidentiality agreements====
 The argument runs that it might be hard to prove that you’ve lost any money as a result of a confidentiality breach, so you want to be sure that [[equitable remedies]] like [[injunction]]s ordering the other guy to keep his mouth shut – those, under English law, that do not technically arise under the law of contract – are available to you.