How can Simon Lowe, with Daniel Hardman, sue Harvey Specter in connection with the doctrine of unclean hands?

In the last 2 episodes of Suits Season 8, Simon Lowe sues, via his attorney Daniel Hardman, Harvey Specter for breaking privilege. Without spoiling that

one could argue that technically it was Donna and not Harvey who broke privilege (Of course another could argue that Harvey should not have told Donna because privilege didn't extend to her anymore because of the two opposing clients, Simon Lowe and Thomas Kessler, had lawyers in the same firm, and the clients signed conflict of interest waivers. Yet still another could argue that the conflict of interest waivers might have or should have protected Harvey or Donna)

, the situation was that Simon Lowe used Thomas Kessler as a stalking horse and intended to break a verbal contract made to Kessler. This seems very unclean to me, in the sense of unclean hands or clean hands or dirty hands,

an equitable defense in which the defendant argues that the plaintiff is not entitled to obtain an equitable remedy because the plaintiff is acting unethically or has acted in bad faith with respect to the subject of the complaint—that is, with "unclean hands".

So either

1. Case 1: I'm misinterpreting unclean hands. How am I misinterpreting, if asking this is on-topic? Otherwise, I might have to go to the law stackexchange.

2. Case 2: I'm interpreting unclean hands correctly but have missed or misinterpreted something in the show. What is it?

3. Case 3: I'm interpreting unclean hands correctly and have not missed or misinterpreted anything in the show. How does Simon Lowe overcome unclean hands? ("Bad writing" or "unrealistic scenario" or "mistake" is an acceptable response.)

4. Case 4: There is another case. What is the other case?