Interpreting a nondisclosure agreement under English law, this decision holds that a clause stating that “this agreement shall terminate on a date 2 years from the date hereof” ended the entire agreement after two years, including the defendant’s obligation not to disclose the trade secret information it had learned from plaintiff during the existence of the agreement. This interpretation was different from the district court’s reading of the contract, leading to reversal of a $60 million judgment since the jury’s verdict did not segregate the damages or breaches by date–i.e., before and after expiration of the contract. In awarding punitive damages, the district court also erred. Punitive damages could be recovered for misappropriation of trade secrets, but not for breach of contract, and the jury verdict did not segregate damages between the two. The district court gave no reason for assuming all damages were awarded on the misappropriation claim and using the entire compensatory award as a yardstick for measuring punitive damages. The district court also erred, for the same reason, in awarding prejudgment interest under Civ. Code 3288 on the entire compensatory damage award, since that section applies only to breach of contract damages, and as stated the verdict did not reveal how much was awarded for breach of contract and how much for misappropriation of trade secrets.