Jonathan Hill appeared for the Appellant, Kieran Corrigan & Co Limited (“KCL”) in its appeal against the decision of Jonathan Hilliard KC (sitting as a Deputy High Court Judge) (“the Judge”) to dismiss claims for breach of confidence against the Respondent (“Mr. Timol”). The claims related to the alleged misuse by a company of which Mr. Timol was a director, of confidential information concerning a tax planning structure that KCL had devised. The Court of Appeal allowed the appeal.
First, the Court of Appeal dismissed KCL’s argument that once confidential information is received by a person in confidence, if that person subsequently authorises acts that involve the misuse of that information by others, liability is strict and cannot be avoided because the defendant does not know that the others were misusing the information. It held that Mr. Timol’s conduct was not enough to find primary liability for breach of confidence as he did not use the confidential information that he had been given, even though he had unwittingly signed off its use.
However, the Court held that documents obtained by KCL that should have been disclosed earlier by Mr Timol suggested that Mr. Timol might have been aware of the confidential information’s misuse or have misused the confidential information himself. These documents could therefore potentially influence the assessment of Mr. Timol’s liability and would have made a material difference to the conduct of the trial. Consequently, the Court held that it would be just and appropriate to allow the appeal and order a retrial of the claim against Mr. Timol on the basis that the decision of the Judge was unjust because of a serious irregularity in the proceedings in the High Court within the meaning of CPR 52.21(3)(b).