Injunction granted to restrain ex-employees from using LinkedIn contacts
12th September, 2013
The rapid growth of LinkedIn has seen the establishment of a vital business tool, critically, however, there is little judicial guidance with regard to issues of ownership. The terms and conditions of LinkedIn state that ownership of the account is personal to the account holder, leading to disputes when an organisation attempts to assert ownership of employee’s LinkedIn contacts.
In the recent case of Whitmar Publications Limited v Gamage and Others  EWHC 1881 CH; Judgment 4 July 2013, the High Court held that LinkedIn contacts can constitute confidential information belonging to an employer.
Previously to Whitmar, case law has provided some answers. In Hays Specialist Recruitment (Holdings) Ltd & Anor v Ions & Anor  EWHC 745 the court held that contacts uploaded to personal LinkedIn accounts could constitute company property when employment terminated; and Pennwell Publishing (UK) Ltd v Ornstein  IRLR 700 held that where an employee created and kept all his contacts on his employer’s computer system, that database of information belonged to the employer.
Whitmar’s further confirmation of the above saw the court grant injunctive relief to the Claimant employer. Mr Gamage, an ex-employee, attempted to further his competing business by using LinkedIn groups maintained by Whitmar. Although his activity was discovered by Whitmar, he and his co-defendants remained employed and continued the activity. The court granted a ‘springboard’ injunction to Whitmar to prevent the defendants from gaining a competitive advantage in their new business, based on their theft of confidential information and activity which included the use of LinkedIn contacts. The judgement confirms that contacts which appeared as the employee’s contacts will be found to belong to the employer with the same status as confidential information if the LinkedIn group is owned and maintained by the employer themselves, prohibiting misuse with regard to competition.
The decision in Whitmar is also consistent with the position in US law. Most recently it was held in the case of Eagle v Edcom that the court will look at the circumstances in which an employee’s LinkedIn profile is established and maintained, to determine the ownership of the LinkedIn account.
With this in mind, when creating a social media account an employer can take certain measures to give themselves optimum protection from potential court proceedings. These can include:
• using the Company address as the employees’ address;
• the input of all text;
• making building the LinkedIn profile with contacts a requirement of the employee’s role; and
• telling the employee what password to use.
It is important to note that for many businesses the difficulty in proving financial loss (especially where contacts are only prospective clients) and the costs of an injunction application mean litigation may not be cost-effective, so best practice would be to include the appropriate information in contracts of employment.
For further information or advice regarding social media and its effect in employment law, please contact Paul Bennett on 01743 453685 or send an email to [email protected].
You might also be interested in...
16th November, 2018
It is reported that a quarter of all complaints dealt with by the Legal Ombudsman revolve around costs therefore to avoid complaints and confusion, it is important to be clear from the outset. The new Transparency Rules (which the SRA have now confirmed will come into effect on 6 December 2018) require that accurate and relevant information is... Read More »
5th November, 2018
Aaron & Partners LLP has once again seen improved rankings in The Legal 500 – a comprehensive guide... Read More »
10th October, 2018
In the lead up to World Mental Health Day on 10 October 2018, we have been posting a series of short articles discussing mental health and stress in the workplace. In this final article, we will be providing tips, to employers and employees, for managing stress and dealing with mental ill health in the workplace. Click here to... Read More »