IT disputes

IT disputes

This subtopic contains the following guidance on IT disputes. It covers:

•
pre-action conduct
•
conduct and process
•
alternative dispute resolution/settlement
•
remedies

For guidance on the key legal issues concerning IT disputes, see Practice Note: Key issues in IT disputes.

Pre-action conduct

For guidance on pre-action conduct, see the following Practice Notes:

•
Resolving a dispute—initial considerations
•
Types of dispute resolution clauses—litigation, mediation, multi-tier, hybrid and carve-out clauses
•
Pre-action

To view the latest version of this document and thousands of others like it, sign-in with LexisNexis or register for a free trial.

TAKE A FREE TRIAL

Latest TMT News

Ofcom launches investigation into online image boards over Online Safety Act 2023 duties

Ofcom has launched a formal investigation under the Online Safety Act 2023 into the provider of two unnamed online image boards to determine whether it has failed to comply with its duties to protect people in the UK from illegal content, including non-consensual intimate images and child sexual abuse material. Following engagement with victims, survivors and advocacy groups and an initial assessment of the sites, Ofcom will examine whether the provider conducted an adequate illegal content risk assessment, implemented proportionate measures to prevent users encountering priority illegal content, minimised the time such content remains online, removed illegal material promptly when aware of it, set out appropriate protections in its terms of service, and operated effective reporting and complaints procedures. Ofcom stated that its role is to assess compliance with statutory obligations rather than direct the removal of specific content, and confirmed that, if a breach is found, it may require remedial action, impose fines of up to £18m or 10% of qualifying worldwide revenue, or seek court-ordered business disruption measures, while reiterating that services accessible to UK users must comply with UK law.

Commission convenes Special Panel on child safety online

The European Commission hosted the first meeting of its Special Panel on child safety online. The panel examined evidence regarding the risks and benefits associated with children’s use of social media, gaming, messaging apps and artificial intelligence. Initially announced in the 2025 State of the Union address, the panel will investigate the possibility of implementing harmonised age restrictions for social media access. Its goal is to present a set of recommendations to Commission President, Ursula von der Leyen by summer 2026.

TMT weekly highlights—5 March 2026

Welcome to this week’s edition of the TMT weekly highlights: a hand-picked summary of news analysis, updates and new content from across the technology, media and telecoms sectors. These highlights focus on key topics including new technologies, software, cloud computing, internet, outsourcing, music, film & television, publishing, defamation and telecoms.

Court’s inherent jurisdiction and injunctive relief in harassment cases (Titan v Okunola)

Dispute Resolution analysis: This case concerned the court’s power to grant an injunction to restrain a litigant from sending abusive communications to an opposing party’s legal team. The High Court dismissed the application, stating that there was no ‘sound jurisdictional basis’ for such relief. The Court of Appeal held this was wrong: the court does have inherent jurisdiction at common law to protect the integrity of its own proceedings. However, the court agreed that refusal of the injunction was appropriate, as there was no ongoing risk and other discretionary factors weighed against relief. The judgment provides guidance for practitioners considering how to address disruptive litigation conduct. It clarifies the scope of the court’s inherent jurisdiction where behaviour poses a serious risk to the administration of justice. Where the conduct falls short of contempt, practitioners seeking such injunctions must also consider the impact of Article 10 ECHR, section 12 HRA, and litigation immunity. The case further highlights appropriate procedural routes and key discretionary factors relevant to injunctive relief. Written by Sarah Ellington, partner at Watson Farley & Williams LLP.