Get 20M+ Full-Text Papers For Less Than $1.50/day. Start a 14-Day Trial for You or Your Team.

Learn More →

Gus Consulting GmbH v Leboeuf, Lamb, Greene, and McCrae

Gus Consulting GmbH v Leboeuf, Lamb, Greene, and McCrae 26 May 2006 Brooke, Mummery and Baker LJJ Court of Appeal [2006] EWCA Civ 683 [2006] ArbLR 31 Arbitration proceedings--Interim relief--Confidentiality--Solicitor representing one party transferring to opposite party's former law firm--Whether former law firm in possession of confidential information (yes)--Whether risk of disclosure of confidential information (no)--Arbitration Act 1996, s 44 Law firm can act in arbitration against former client Gus Consulting (`CAIB') was represented by the law firm, Leboeuf Lamb, in a series of transactions in the 1990s. CAIB ceased being a client of Leboeuf Lamb. Disputes between CAIB and DCL were referred to arbitration. DCL was represented by Debevoise Plimpton. A number of lawyers representing CAIB subsequently moved from Debevoise Plimpton to Leboeuf Lamb. CAIB sought an injunction prohibiting Leboeuf Lamb from representing DCL. At first instance, the injunction was refused.1 Leboeuf Lamb was in possession of confidential information; however, there was no risk of disclosure. The situation involved information relating principally to transactional matters conducted nine years earlier. This was distinguishable from a situation involving the transfer of someone with current knowledge of a litigation matter. The law firm had taken suitable precautions to protect the confidential information. CAIB applied to the Court of Appeal http://www.deepdyve.com/assets/images/DeepDyve-Logo-lg.png Arbitration Law Reports and Review Oxford University Press

Gus Consulting GmbH v Leboeuf, Lamb, Greene, and McCrae

Arbitration Law Reports and Review , Volume 2006 (1) – Jan 1, 2006

Gus Consulting GmbH v Leboeuf, Lamb, Greene, and McCrae

Arbitration Law Reports and Review , Volume 2006 (1) – Jan 1, 2006

Abstract

26 May 2006 Brooke, Mummery and Baker LJJ Court of Appeal [2006] EWCA Civ 683 [2006] ArbLR 31 Arbitration proceedings--Interim relief--Confidentiality--Solicitor representing one party transferring to opposite party's former law firm--Whether former law firm in possession of confidential information (yes)--Whether risk of disclosure of confidential information (no)--Arbitration Act 1996, s 44 Law firm can act in arbitration against former client Gus Consulting (`CAIB') was represented by the law firm, Leboeuf Lamb, in a series of transactions in the 1990s. CAIB ceased being a client of Leboeuf Lamb. Disputes between CAIB and DCL were referred to arbitration. DCL was represented by Debevoise Plimpton. A number of lawyers representing CAIB subsequently moved from Debevoise Plimpton to Leboeuf Lamb. CAIB sought an injunction prohibiting Leboeuf Lamb from representing DCL. At first instance, the injunction was refused.1 Leboeuf Lamb was in possession of confidential information; however, there was no risk of disclosure. The situation involved information relating principally to transactional matters conducted nine years earlier. This was distinguishable from a situation involving the transfer of someone with current knowledge of a litigation matter. The law firm had taken suitable precautions to protect the confidential information. CAIB applied to the Court of Appeal

Loading next page...
 
/lp/oxford-university-press/gus-consulting-gmbh-v-leboeuf-lamb-greene-and-mccrae-Pq2lHsPJCB

References (0)

References for this paper are not available at this time. We will be adding them shortly, thank you for your patience.

Publisher
Oxford University Press
Copyright
© Oxford University Press, 2009
Subject
Judgments
ISSN
2044-8651
eISSN
2044-9887
DOI
10.1093/alrr/2006.1.409
Publisher site
See Article on Publisher Site

Abstract

26 May 2006 Brooke, Mummery and Baker LJJ Court of Appeal [2006] EWCA Civ 683 [2006] ArbLR 31 Arbitration proceedings--Interim relief--Confidentiality--Solicitor representing one party transferring to opposite party's former law firm--Whether former law firm in possession of confidential information (yes)--Whether risk of disclosure of confidential information (no)--Arbitration Act 1996, s 44 Law firm can act in arbitration against former client Gus Consulting (`CAIB') was represented by the law firm, Leboeuf Lamb, in a series of transactions in the 1990s. CAIB ceased being a client of Leboeuf Lamb. Disputes between CAIB and DCL were referred to arbitration. DCL was represented by Debevoise Plimpton. A number of lawyers representing CAIB subsequently moved from Debevoise Plimpton to Leboeuf Lamb. CAIB sought an injunction prohibiting Leboeuf Lamb from representing DCL. At first instance, the injunction was refused.1 Leboeuf Lamb was in possession of confidential information; however, there was no risk of disclosure. The situation involved information relating principally to transactional matters conducted nine years earlier. This was distinguishable from a situation involving the transfer of someone with current knowledge of a litigation matter. The law firm had taken suitable precautions to protect the confidential information. CAIB applied to the Court of Appeal

Journal

Arbitration Law Reports and ReviewOxford University Press

Published: Jan 1, 2006

There are no references for this article.