header-logo header-logo

27 September 2007 / Navdeep Gill
Issue: 7290 / Categories: Features , Employment
printer mail-detail

Getting personal

Employees should be wary of storing too much personal information on work computers, says Navdeep Gill

Employees will need to consider how much personal use they make of their employers’ computer systems after the recent High Court case of PennWell Publishing (UK) Ltd v Isles and others [2007] EWHC 1570 (QB), [2007] All ER (D) 180 (Jun). It was held that an employee’s contacts kept on the employer’s computer system belonged to the employer and not the employee. This was despite the fact that some of the information included personal contacts of the employee and contacts that predated his employment.

PERSONAL CONTACTS

The case involved a journalist, Junior Isles, employed by PennWell, a media company organising conferences and exhibitions for the energy and power industry. Isles was employed by PennWell as a publisher and conference chairman. When Isles joined PennWell he brought with him a list of journalistic and personal contacts he had accumulated throughout his career. During his time at PennWell, Isles gradually transferred these contacts to PennWell’s system and maintained it on PennWell’s

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

NLJ Career Profile: Ken Fowlie, Stowe Family Law

NLJ Career Profile: Ken Fowlie, Stowe Family Law

Ken Fowlie, chairman of Stowe Family Law, reflects on more than 30 years in legal services after ‘falling into law’

Jackson Lees Group—Jannina Barker, Laura Beattie & Catherine McCrindle

Jackson Lees Group—Jannina Barker, Laura Beattie & Catherine McCrindle

Firm promotes senior associate and team leader as wills, trusts and probate team expands

Asserson—Michael Francos-Downs

Asserson—Michael Francos-Downs

Manchester real estate finance practice welcomes legal director

NEWS
Children can claim for ‘lost years’ damages in personal injury cases, the Supreme Court has held in a landmark judgment
Holiday lets may promise easy returns, but restrictive covenants can swiftly scupper plans. Writing in NLJ this week, Andrew Francis of Serle Court recounts how covenants limiting use to a ‘private dwelling house’ or ‘private residence’ have repeatedly defeated short-term letting schemes
Artificial intelligence (AI) is already embedded in the civil courts, but regulation lags behind practice. Writing in NLJ this week, Ben Roe of Baker McKenzie charts a landscape where AI assists with transcription, case management and document handling, yet raises acute concerns over evidence, advocacy and even judgment-writing
The Supreme Court has drawn a firm line under branding creativity in regulated markets. In Dairy UK Ltd v Oatly AB, it ruled that Oatly’s ‘post-milk generation’ trade mark unlawfully deployed a protected dairy designation. In NLJ this week, Asima Rana of DWF explains that the court prioritised ‘regulatory clarity over creative branding choices’, holding that ‘designation’ extends beyond product names to marketing slogans
From cat fouling to Part 36 brinkmanship, the latest 'Civil way' round-up is a reminder that procedural skirmishes can have sharp teeth. NLJ columnist Stephen Gold ranges across recent decisions with his customary wit
back-to-top-scroll