header-logo header-logo

Home Login E-newsletter About us
10 March 2023 / Neil Parpworth
Issue: 8016 / Categories: Features , Procedure & practice , Contempt
printer mail-detail

For your eyes only...(Pt 3)

© Copyright LexisNexis 2026. All Rights Reserved.
113992
Neil Parpworth considers the limits of the court’s leniency when it comes to breaching an embargo
  • In Interdigital Technology Corp and others v Lenovo Group Ltd and others [2023] EWCA Civ 57, in which a draft judgment was circulated despite its embargo, the Court of Appeal considered that the circumstances were not sufficiently egregious to warrant further action to be taken against the contemnor.
  • However, properly respecting an embargo ought to remain a priority, since the courts may eventually decide that a formal sanction is necessary to deter others from making the same mistake.

In delivering the judgment of the Court of Appeal in R (on the application of Counsel General for Wales) v Secretary of State for Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy [2022] EWCA Civ 181, [2022] All ER (D) 79 (Feb), the Master of the Rolls Sir Geoffrey Vos noted that as far as he had been able to discover, there had only been two previous court decisions relating to the breach of an embargo on

If you are not a subscriber, subscribe now to read this content
If you are already a subscriber sign in
...or Register for two weeks' free access to subscriber content

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Read All
Sponsored by
NLJ Career Profile: Nikki Bowker, Devonshires

NLJ Career Profile: Nikki Bowker, Devonshires

Nikki Bowker, head of litigation and dispute resolution at Devonshires, on career resilience, diversity in law and channelling Elle Woods when the pressure is on

Ellisons—Sarah Osborne

Ellisons—Sarah Osborne

Leasehold enfranchisement specialist joins residential property team

DWF—Chris Air

DWF—Chris Air

Firm strengthens commercial team in Manchester with partner appointment

NEWS
Read All
NLJ this week: When post-breach events rewrite damages claims
Contract damages are usually assessed at the date of breach—but not always. Writing in NLJ this week, Ian Gascoigne, knowledge lawyer at LexisNexis, examines the growing body of cases where courts have allowed later events to reshape compensation
NLJ this week: Supreme Court redraws unfair prejudice rules
The Supreme Court has restored ‘doctrinal coherence’ to unfair prejudice litigation, writes Natalie Quinlivan, partner at Fieldfisher LLP, in this week' NLJ
NLJ this week: ‘Joe Donor’ ruling exposes dangers of unregulated conception
The High Court’s refusal to recognise a prolific sperm donor as a child’s legal parent has highlighted the risks of informal conception arrangements, according to Liam Hurren, associate at Kingsley Napley, in NLJ this week
NLJ this week: CILEX warns Mazur ruling must spark reform
The Court of Appeal’s decision in Mazur may have settled questions around litigation supervision, but the profession should not simply ‘move on’, argues Jennifer Coupland, CEO of CILEX, in this week's NLJ
NLJ this week: Conditional job offers carry hidden risks for employers
A simple phrase like ‘subject to references’ may not protect employers as much as they think. Writing in NLJ this week, Ian Smith, barrister and emeritus professor of employment law at UEA, analyses recent employment cases showing how conditional job offers can still create binding contracts
Copyright © 2026 LexisNexis
back-to-top-scroll