or immoral material (in the same way as under copyright law) •scandalous – Stephens v Avery [1988] FSR 510 Good friends, but then they because one of them had provided won’t anymore information the press about a lesbian relationship between the plaintiff and another woman. Husband of woman who had lesbian affair had murdered his wife. Action for breach of confidence successful here. Certain practices protectable. However, if it was not the case, if it was scandalous alone, murder, and not about their private sexual life in general, it be protected by confidence. won’t provided with consent •Information C v C [1946] 1 All ER 562 Torrington Manufacturing Co. v Smith [1966] RPC 285, cf. to Regina Glass Fibre v Schuller [1972] RPC 229 Paitient doctor relationship Idea that paitients info shld be confidential. Veneral disease. Failed. INFORMATION had been provided by consent of paitient. Regina Glass Fibre v Schuller [1972] RPC 229 License agreement for production of goods ending. Court said that when a contract ends, confidential information under that contract will continue remaining confidential. Right to use confidential information after termination of contract. Gartside v Outram (1856) 26 LJ Ch 113 Person working for company. Evidence brought from company. He disclosed it. Fraud. Any action would be confidential. “there can be no confidence which can be relied on to restrain a disclosure of iniquity” Iniquity can be broad Woodward v Hutchins [1977] 2 All ER 751 – Case involving musicians. Musicians trying to present themselves in a positive light. Manger say they had behaved in a good way in order to attract more sponsorship. What came to lght was some details regarding thwir private lives, e.g. the taking drugs. They wanted to retrain information coming out of public domain.
•scandalous or immoral material (in the same way as under copyright law) – Stephens v Avery [1988] FSR 510 Good friends, but then they won’t anymore because one of them had provided information the press about a lesbian relationship between the plaintiff and another woman. Husband of woman who had lesbian affair had murdered his wife. Action for breach of confidence successful here. Certain practices protectable. However, if it was not the case, if it was scandalous alone, murder, and not about their private sexual life in general, it won’t be protected by confidence. •Information provided with consent C v C [1946] 1 All ER 562 Torrington Manufacturing Co. v Smith [1966] RPC 285, cf. to Regina Glass Fibre v Schuller [1972] RPC 229 Paitient doctor relationship Idea that paitients info shld be confidential. Veneral disease. Failed. INFORMATION had been provided by consent of paitient. Regina Glass Fibre v Schuller [1972] RPC 229 License agreement for production of goods ending. Court said that when a contract ends, confidential information under that contract will continue remaining confidential. Right to use confidential information after termination of contract. Gartside v Outram (1856) 26 LJ Ch 113 Person working for company. Evidence brought from company. He disclosed it. Fraud. Any action would be confidential. “there can be no confidence which can be relied on to restrain a disclosure of iniquity” Iniquity can be broad – Woodward v Hutchins [1977] 2 All ER 751 Case involving musicians. Musicians trying to present themselves in a positive light. Manger say they had behaved in a good way in order to attract more sponsorship. What came to lght was some details regarding thwir private lives, e.g. the taking drugs. They wanted to retrain information coming out of public domain.
13-11-13.docx