A useful conversation starts with the right information
You may want to understand PHARMORIS as a commercial business, examine a research development question or explore a strategic relationship. The information needed will differ. This page explains a proposed route from an initial enquiry to a scoped discussion, including how confidentiality can be considered where appropriate. It begins with your purpose and the decision you are assessing, so that a briefing can be relevant without requiring either party to disclose more than the conversation needs.
Tell us what you are evaluating
Start with your name, organisation, role and a work contact address. Explain whether you are approaching as an investor, corporate-development team, strategic collaborator or professional adviser. A short description of your mandate, relevant sector experience and jurisdiction gives useful context. If you prefer not to disclose an indicative participation range at this stage, explain the type of opportunity you usually consider instead.
The most helpful question is specific. You might want to examine the first PHARMORIS buyer, the proposed evaluation model, a research milestone or the distinction between company development and a particular programme. The initial note should stay non-confidential. It does not need patient information, confidential scientific results, another company’s private commercial data or an unpublished investment-committee paper.
A briefing built around your decision
Tell us whether you want to understand the PHARMORIS business, evaluate a research development question or examine a strategic relationship. An initial company discussion can focus on the intended buyer, the work PHARMORIS is designed to support, the evidence currently available and the next comparison that would make the proposition more assessable. That is useful context before either party needs to exchange sensitive information.
For a commercial or investor discussion, the next questions are concrete: who owns the decision and budget; what the ordinary process already achieves; which delivery costs matter; and whether the same task recurs often enough to support an ongoing product. We can agree which questions a further briefing should answer and the material relevant to your mandate, stage and jurisdiction.
When a discussion requires round-specific information, the relevant issuer, proposed use of capital, instrument, assumptions and approval status need to be confirmed in reviewed materials. The enquiry below begins a human conversation about fit and information scope. It does not reserve participation or accept an investment.
Public first. Confidential where it helps.
The public proposition and a scoped non-confidential conversation should explain what the company is working to establish. If a further question genuinely requires non-public material, we can consider an appropriate confidentiality agreement and agree the particular evidence, recipients and purpose. A useful diligence process reveals enough to evaluate the question while respecting unpublished know-how and information belonging to other parties.
An NDA is a legal contract. The IPO recommends defining its permitted purpose carefully (IPO, 2015). You can request consideration of an agreement or identify the form your organisation ordinarily uses. The discussion should establish the parties, the information each expects to share, the reviewing contact and authorised signatories. Agreement and disclosure are separate decisions.
Review the draft before signing
The proposed process is to review the request, agree the scope, prepare or review a draft and resolve the material terms before authorised signatures. Those terms may include the definition of protected information, permitted recipients, exclusions, duration, handling of compelled disclosure and return or retention of material. Applicable law and jurisdiction need an explicit decision; NEUVIOR’s Scottish incorporation should not be used to assume that every counterparty agreement has the same governing law.
A draft would remain a draft until the relevant parties have approved and executed it through an appropriate process. This website does not automatically issue a binding NDA, insert a signature, accept a counterparty’s terms or promise legal review on a fixed timetable. The IPO provides example one-way and mutual agreements as reference material; the suitability of a particular document still depends on the parties and the intended exchange.
Agree the disclosure, even after agreement
Where an agreement is executed, the next step is to confirm the particular material and recipients relevant to the discussion. Confidentiality does not by itself grant an IP licence, ownership of research, access to personal data or permission to use a product operationally. A scoped disclosure can give an investor enough evidence to examine a question while retaining control of unpublished know-how, proprietary implementation detail and information belonging to other parties.
Research institutions and public bodies can have disclosure duties that require consideration in the agreement. Collaborations also raise ownership and publication questions separate from confidentiality. The IPO’s Lambert Toolkit provides starting points for research collaboration discussions and states that its models are designed for English law (IPO, 2022). Those models should not be presented as an automatic solution for a Scottish or international arrangement.
Know what the next step means
A productive first conversation may lead to a more specific evidence request, a follow-up with the appropriate people, an agreed review process or a decision that the opportunity is not a fit. None of those outcomes should be confused with an investment, partnership or product commitment. If a proposed request would require disproportionate disclosure or cannot be supported by the available evidence, a narrower discussion may be more useful.
Use the enquiry route below to describe your purpose and the information you would like to understand. If you are requesting NDA consideration, state that in the note and identify your organisation’s reviewing contact. Keep the first request non-confidential. We can then consider the appropriate scope, whether a confidentiality discussion is needed and what a practical next step would involve for both parties.
References
Intellectual Property Office (2015), Non-disclosure agreements. Official guidance and examples. Checked 13 October 2026.
Intellectual Property Office (2022), University and business collaboration agreements: Lambert Toolkit. Toolkit and jurisdiction guidance. Checked 13 October 2026.
