Search

How can we help?

Icon

Ex-employee ordered to delete confidential information stored on personal devices

In an age where employees are easily able to copy, store and upload confidential information, employers are having to become increasingly vigilant to prevent such information ending up in the wrong hands.  This was an issue for the claimants in Arthur J Gallagher Services (UK) Limited and others v Skriptchenko and others. The Claimants were a group of companies providing insurance brokerage services.  Upon leaving one of these companies, Mr Skriptchenko took the Claimants’ client list with him and used it to approach over 300 of the Claimants’ clients after joining a competitor firm.

The Claimants successfully applied for an order to inspect electronic devices and computers belonging to Mr Skriptchenko and his new employer. The Claimants were also granted an order that if any confidential  information relating to the Claimants was found, it was to be destroyed. In the absence of any previous authority on the destruction of confidential material, the High Court provided a detailed explanation as to why an order for destruction was appropriate in this case. The Court was particularly influenced by the “high degree of subterfuge” in this case and the fact that Mr Skriptchenko and his new employer knowingly breached confidentiality. The Court agreed with the Claimants that Mr Skriptchenko and his employer could not be trusted to delete any confidential information themselves and so a third party was appointed to inspect and destruct the material.

In an age where employees are easily able to copy, store and upload confidential information, employers are having to become increasingly vigilant to prevent such information ending up in the wrong hands.

Although a small victory for employers, Mr Skriptchenko and his employer admitted that they had breached the Claimants’ confidentiality which played a key part in the Court’s willingness to grant an injunction. Employers who suspect but have little evidence to show that an ex-employee has taken confidential information are likely to face greater difficulties. To guard against this risk, employment contracts should clearly set out the employee’s obligations on termination  which employers may want to mirror in a Bring Your Own Device to Work policy.

Employmentbuddy.com 

Disclaimer

This information is for guidance purposes only and should not be regarded as a substitute for taking legal advice. Please refer to the full General Notices on our website.

Author profile

Monica Atwal

Managing Partner

View profile

+44 118 960 4605

About this article

Read, listen and watch our latest insights

art
  • 23 July 2026
  • Immigration

New Priority Service for British citizenship applications: Faster decisions now available

The Home Office has introduced a new Priority Service for British citizenship applications, allowing eligible applicants to receive a decision on their naturalisation or registration application in around 30 working days, rather than waiting the standard processing time of up to six months.

Pub
  • 21 July 2026
  • Corporate and M&A

Quarterly Insights: Key Corporate & Commercial Topics – Q3 2026

Join Stuart Mullins and Jonathan Hayes as they explore the most topical corporate and commercial issues, along with key developments our team has examined over the past three months. In Q3, they discuss CICs, company registers, and the use of NDAs in business sales and exits.

art
  • 20 July 2026
  • Privacy and Data Protection

Personal Data FAQs

Explore comprehensive answers to frequently asked questions about personal data, GDPR compliance, and your rights.

art
  • 16 July 2026
  • Corporate and M&A

EMIs – The basics

Discover the essentials of Enterprise Management Incentives (EMIs), an HMRC-approved employee share scheme offering tax advantages. Learn how EMIs incentivise staff, eligibility requirements, and how Clarkslegal can help tailor a scheme for you.

Pub
  • 15 July 2026
  • Litigation and dispute resolution

ICC Arbitration Rules 2026 overhaul: The end of Terms of Reference and future trends – Episode 3

In this final episode, Jack Hobbs (Clarkslegal) and Christopher Howitt (Three Stone) discuss the impact of the ICC Arbitration Rules 2026 overhaul, focusing on the end of Terms of Reference. Hear expert insights and practical tips for adapting to the new rules.

art
  • 15 July 2026
  • Employment

New guidance on interim relief: More applications, same high threshold

In certain limited unfair dismissal claims (such as those for automatic unfair dismissal relating to a protected disclosure) claimants can apply for interim relief. This is an emergency measure which essentially prevents a dismissal from taking effect until the claim has been heard.