Marks and Spencer plc v Freshfields Bruckhaus Deringer (A Firm): ChD 2 Jun 2004

The claimant sought an injunction preventing the respondent form of solicitors acting for a client in a bid for the claimant, saying that the firm was continuing to act for it, and that a conflict of interest arose.
Held: Though the transactions were different, there remained a sufficient risk of conflict. Most cases on the issue related to single issue conflicts, but the rule was not so restricted. There was insufficient reason to think ‘the double employment rule being limited to same matter conflicts. I accept there must be some reasonable relationship between the two matters, but they do not, in my judgment, have to be the same. ‘ As to the poossible use of Chinese Wall arrangements: ‘So far as confidential information is concerned, it is obviously a huge amount of confidential information within Freshfields in relation to Marks and Spencer’s affairs through acting for it over the years, some of which may be material to the bid, if only to be discarded. I cannot see, even with a firm the size of Freshfields, that effective information barriers can be put in place given the very large number of people involved, even on the two matters. There must be very many Freshfields people with knowledge of Marks and Spencer’s confidential information. In those circumstances I am satisfied that the Chinese Walls cannot be or be seen to be sufficient.’

Judges:

Lawrence Collins J

Citations:

Times 18-Jun-2004, [2004] EWHC 1337 (Ch)

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

CitedPrince Jefri Bolkiah v KPMG (A Firm) HL 16-Dec-1998
Conflicts of Duty with former Client
The House was asked as to the duties of the respondent accountants (KPMG). KPMG had information confidential to a former client, the appellant, which might be relevant to instructions which they then accepted from the Brunei Investment Agency, of . .
CitedMothew (T/a Stapley and Co) v Bristol and West Building Society CA 24-Jul-1996
The solicitor, acting in a land purchase transaction for his lay client and the plaintiff, had unwittingly misled the claimant by telling the claimant that the purchasers were providing the balance of the purchase price themselves without recourse . .
CitedRe Baron Investments (Holdings) Ltd 2001
Conflict of interest – double employment . .
CitedDunford and Elliott v Johnson and Firth Brown CA 1977
A report which had been prepared confidentially was disclosed to 43 per cent of shareholders of a company (the institutional shareholders), but not the others, who then complained to the court.
Held: The others were entitled to the . .
CitedYoung, Young, Irby v Robson Rhodes and Frank Attwood ChD 30-Mar-1999
Where a merger was proposed between two accountancy firms, who had provided litigation support services to opposing sides in a case, it was necessary to separate the two halves most rigorously including physical separation in order to ensure no . .
CitedRakusen v Elliss, Munday and Clark 1912
A firm of solicitors had two partners, who did business separately without having any knowledge of the affairs of each other’s clients. The plaintiff consulted one partner in an action for wrongful dismissal a company. He changed his solicitors and . .

Cited by:

Appeal fromMarks and Spencer Group Plc and Another v Freshfields Bruckhaus Deringer CA 3-Jun-2004
The defendant firm of solicitors sought leave to appeal against an injunction requiring them not to act for a client in making a bid to take over the business of the claimant, a former client of the firm.
Held: Leave was refused. The appeal . .
CitedRatiu, Karmel, Regent House Properties Ltd v Conway CA 22-Nov-2005
The claimant sought damages for defamation. The defendant through their company had accused him acting in such a way as to allow a conflict of interest to arise. They said that he had been invited to act on a proposed purchase but had used the . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Legal Professions

Updated: 27 June 2022; Ref: scu.198394