When valuable confidential information is misused, particularly to establish or support a competing business, the consequences can go far beyond the information itself. Customer relationships, commercial know-how and years of investment can all be put at risk, leaving businesses with difficult decisions about how best to protect their position.

Following a significant High Court judgment in favour of EMJ Plastics Limited in EMJ Plastics Limited v Mekina Industries Limited, Ian Baggaley and Mark Johnson [2026] EWHC 2163 (Ch), Mike Wilson, Partner in our Commercial Litigation team and lead Partner on the matter, reflects on the case, the decision to pursue proceedings and the wider lessons for businesses seeking to protect their confidential information.

A hard-fought case

This was a long-running and heavily contested dispute concerning the misuse of EMJ Plastics’ confidential information in connection with the establishment and operation of a competing business.

From the outset, EMJ’s position was clear. The business believed that confidential information developed through years of investment, experience and customer relationships had been misused, and that action was necessary to protect its legitimate commercial interests.

Taking a case of this nature to the High Court is a significant undertaking for any business. Litigation requires commitment, resilience and a clear understanding of what the business is ultimately seeking to protect and achieve. Throughout the matter, our focus was therefore not simply on the legal arguments, but on understanding EMJ’s wider commercial position and supporting the business through what became a lengthy process.

A significant judgment

The judgment handed down by Recorder Douglas Campbell KC in the Business and Property Courts represents a significant outcome for EMJ and provides important guidance on the protection of confidential information, employee obligations and unlawful competition.

The Court found in EMJ’s favour on substantial elements of its case, including claims for breach of confidence, breach of contract, breach of fiduciary duty, joint liability and unlawful means conspiracy.

Those findings are important because they support the fundamental position EMJ maintained throughout the proceedings: that its confidential information had been misused and that bringing legal action was necessary to protect the business.

The Defendants had argued that EMJ was using the proceedings to suppress competition. The Court expressly rejected that case. Instead, the judgment concluded that it was the Defendants’ unlawful acts and lies that had driven EMJ to litigation, rather than EMJ using the action to oppress the Defendants.

The Court also made serious findings concerning the Defendants’ conduct, including that both Mr Baggaley and Mr Johnson had been untruthful on important issues and that the Defendants knew their conduct was unlawful and hoped it would not be discovered.  For EMJ, those findings vindicate the difficult decision it took to pursue the proceedings.

What can other businesses take from the case?

One of the wider lessons from this judgment is that confidential information is often among a business’s most valuable assets, but its value can only be preserved if businesses take appropriate steps to protect it.

The risks can become particularly acute when senior employees leave a business and subsequently become involved in a competing venture. Information concerning customers, commercial relationships and business know-how may have been built up over many years and can be central to a company’s competitive position.

This case is an important reminder that businesses are entitled to protect valuable confidential information and that the courts can intervene where that information is unlawfully retained or used.

The case also illustrates the importance of carefully drafted employment contracts, confidentiality obligations and restrictive covenants in protecting businesses when key employees move on.

It also demonstrates why these disputes need to be considered in their full commercial context. Litigation should never be viewed in isolation from the objectives of the business. The right course will depend on the circumstances, the information at risk and what the business needs to achieve. For our team, that means taking the time to understand not only the legal issues, but also the client, its business and its priorities. In a dispute as demanding as this one, maintaining that close relationship throughout the proceedings is particularly important.

EMJ’s decision to act was driven by a desire to protect confidential information, customer relationships and business know-how developed through years of investment and expertise.

The High Court judgment strongly supports that decision and represents an excellent result following a lengthy and hard-fought process.

The claims and findings are set out in the judgment of Recorder Douglas Campbell KC in EMJ Plastics Limited v Mekina Industries Limited, Ian Baggaley and Mark Johnson [2026] EWHC 2163 (Ch).

If your business is concerned about the misuse of confidential information, the departure of key employees or a dispute involving commercially sensitive information, Mike Wilson and our Commercial Litigation team can provide practical advice on protecting your position and identifying the most appropriate way forward. Please contact Mike or a member of our team to discuss how we can help.