B&M has filed a High Court claim against Morrisons and Simon Buckley, moving its dispute over alleged intellectual property infringement and breach of confidence into court. The filing was made on Thursday, and the case is listed as a copyright and design right matter.
Simon Buckley is named in the claim and is listed on Morrisons' website as a senior buyer of general merchandise. That makes the filing more specific than a broad corporate dispute: B&M has targeted both the retailer and an employee whose role is tied to buying decisions.
B&M and Morrisons in court
B&M said it has commenced legal proceedings against Morrisons in relation to allegations of intellectual property infringement and breach of confidence. It also said it invests significantly in developing its products and protecting its confidential business information, and that it will take appropriate action where it believes those rights have been infringed.
The claim was filed at the High Court, but no hearing has yet taken place. No other details of the claim or the documents are currently available, so the filing sits at the opening stage of the case rather than at any point where a judge has tested the allegations.
Simon Buckley named
Buckley’s inclusion matters because the claim is not only against Morrisons as a company. By naming him, B&M has put an individual employee into a dispute that it says concerns products and confidential business information, even though the exact material at issue has not been made public.
The case also lands while B&M is already involved in a separate dispute with The Skinny Food Co, which launched legal action in February of this year seeking at least £13.8million in damages. In those court documents, George Spalton KC said B&M's decision to de-list Skinny was motivated at least by the breakdown of negotiations between Arora and Skinny and by Arora's desire to make good his threats to 'ruin' Skinny.
The Skinny Food Co case
Spalton also said B&M repeatedly assured Skinny that it could have confidence in B&M as a trading partner, asked for exclusivity in certain product lines and sought to dissuade Skinny from dealing with B&M's competitors. He said that led Skinny to stop pursuing opportunities with Home Bargains and to buy machinery worth more than £235,000 solely to serve anticipated demand for B&M for its products.
The new High Court claim against Morrisons adds another legal front for B&M, but it still leaves the central question open: what specific material or conduct is at the center of the copyright and design right claim. Until the court record opens up further, the dispute is defined less by the allegations themselves than by who has been named in them.
