Unilever Plc v Chefaro Proprietaries Ltd; Chiron Corp etc v Organon: CA 24 Nov 1994

The Court of Appeal gave guidance on what criteria are to be used by them for expediting appeals cases.
Glidewell LJ stated that what must be shown ito establish common design in an allegation of tort is that there are ‘facts from which an inference [of an agreement] could clearly and properly be drawn’.


Glidewell LJ


Times 28-Nov-1994, Independent 24-Nov-1994, [1994] FSR 135


England and Wales

Cited by:

CitedAshton Investments Ltd. and Another v OJSC Russian Aluminium (Rusal) and others ComC 18-Oct-2006
The claimants sought damages for breach of confidence saying that the defendants had hacked into their computer systems via the internet to seek privileged information in the course of litigation. The defendants denied this and said the courts had . .
CitedDouglas and others v Hello! Ltd and others; similar HL 2-May-2007
In Douglas, the claimants said that the defendants had interfered with their contract to provide exclusive photographs of their wedding to a competing magazine, by arranging for a third party to infiltrate and take and sell unauthorised photographs. . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Litigation Practice, Torts – Other

Updated: 28 April 2022; Ref: scu.90056