Confidential business information is a valuable asset and this is especially true of product formulations and manufacturing processes. Helping the business to protect such information from competitors is often a key role for in-house lawyers.
However, EU rules on access to environmental information can provide a mechanism for the public in general – and by way of extension, competitors – to gain access to the commercially sensitive information of businesses being held by public authorities.
Data protection law has received a new public prominence in recent months, with the media focusing in particular on global internet companies, such as Facebook or Google. At the same time, the practical implications of data protection law in a range of contexts have continued to be quietly and incrementally developed in the courts. One recent example is the High Court decision in Guriev v Community Safety Development (UK) Ltd, which offers particularly salutary lessons for those who make use of private investigators.
This year’s GC strategy summit attracted another stellar audience. There were repeat offenders lured back by the anticipation of Portuguese sunshine (which unfortunately failed to materialise) and also many new faces. As the GC’s role continues to evolve and embrace ever more challenges, there was a lot of soul searching this year.
At a recent breakfast briefing hosted by Practical Law, a panel of general counsel and company secretaries of FTSE 100 companies (Eleanor Evans of Rio Tinto, David Jackson of BP and Rosemary Martin of Vodafone) discussed the steps they are taking to implement the Market Abuse Regulation (MAR).
The key takeaways from the briefing related to inside information, inside lists, dealings by persons discharging managerial responsibilities (PDMRs), and closed periods.
Back in March at the GC Leadership Forum, we heard an inspiring keynote about the purposeless company from Will Hutton, chair of the Big Innovation Centre and Principal of Hertford College, Oxford.
Hutton’s proposition is that many companies have – for a variety of reasons – become ownerless, purposeless vehicles driven by short term shareholder requirements that are at odds with a wider concept of the utility of commercial action. We have lost the narrative of capitalism as a tool, not for growth for its own sake or to enrich the few, but for directly improving our lives by making useful things and providing useful services.
“Until you know what it does, it’s artificial intelligence (AI); then it’s just software” is a good way to demystify AI and works just as well for law firm use of AI as for any other sector. Almost halfway through 2016, AI software in the legal services market looks like it is really starting to take off, with firms announcing in increasing numbers that they’re “getting an AI”.
Key themes and developments on the agenda for businesses in June include the EU referendum, responding to announcements made at the anti-corruption summit, changes to company filing requirements and starting preparations for the introduction of the General Data Protection Regulation.
I recently read Tom Bangay’s blog post on how the UK arm of international energy company E.ON reduced its pool of external legal advisors from around 40 to just one: Pinsent Masons. The post highlights four key themes that will resonate with businesses.
Corruption is now centre stage in international politics. Even before the anti-corruption summit in London this month, countries as diverse as Guatemala, Malaysia and Brazil have seen huge demonstrations as citizens expressed their anger at perceived corruption. In Nigeria and Tanzania, electors chose “clean hands” candidates to be their Presidents and clamp down on bribery. And, of course, the Panama papers and Luxleaks have increased public awareness of how companies in high-secrecy jurisdictions can be abused to avoid tax, facilitate bribery and expedite money laundering.
The international anti-corruption summit took place in London last week.