The Court of Appeal held that the inherent jurisdiction to restrain a solicitor from acting cannot be invoked based on a junior lawyer's knowledge of a supervising lawyer's personality, vulnerabilities, and litigation strategies gained through ordinary professional training and mentoring, as such information constitutes mere subjective 'know-how' rather than protectable confidential information. The Court disapproved the dicta in Edgecliff Car Rentals that the inability to identify specific confidential information 'highlights, and is not an answer to, the problem', holding instead that precise identification of confidential information is required and that the jurisdiction must not operate as a de facto restraint of trade on junior lawyers. The Court also held it was an error of principle to make restraint and costs orders against a law firm that had not been joined as a party to the motion, confirming that joinder — not mere notice — is the default requirement where a non-party's legal rights are directly affected.
The full text is available to signed-in members, including the 1 later case that cites this judgment.
1 of the 1 citing case carries a classified treatment. How each court treated it is available to signed-in members.