header-logo header-logo

Getting personal

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

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

CBI South-East Council—Mike Wilson

CBI South-East Council—Mike Wilson

Blake Morgan managing partner appointed chair of CBI South-East Council

Birketts—Phillippa O’Neill

Birketts—Phillippa O’Neill

Commercial dispute resolution team welcomes partner in Cambridge

Charles Russell Speechlys—Matthew Griffin

Charles Russell Speechlys—Matthew Griffin

Firm strengthens international funds capability with senior hire

NEWS
The proposed £11bn redress scheme following the Supreme Court’s motor finance rulings is analysed in this week’s NLJ by Fred Philpott of Gough Square Chambers
In this week's issue, Stephen Gold, NLJ columnist and former district judge, surveys another eclectic fortnight in procedure. With humour and humanity, he reminds readers that beneath the procedural dust, the law still changes lives
Generative AI isn’t the villain of the courtroom—it’s the misunderstanding of it that’s dangerous, argues Dr Alan Ma of Birmingham City University and the Birmingham Law Society in this week's NLJ
James Naylor of Naylor Solicitors dissects the government’s plan to outlaw upward-only rent review (UORR) clauses in new commercial leases under Schedule 31 of the English Devolution and Community Empowerment Bill, in this week's NLJ. The reform, he explains, marks a seismic shift in landlord-tenant power dynamics: rents will no longer rise inexorably, and tenants gain statutory caps and procedural rights
Writing in NLJ this week, James Harrison and Jenna Coad of Penningtons Manches Cooper chart the Privy Council’s demolition of the long-standing ‘shareholder rule’ in Jardine Strategic v Oasis Investments
back-to-top-scroll