Akuna Capital LLC (Delaware) v Ainsley [2018] NSWSC 680

Akuna Capital LLC (Delaware) v Ainsley [2018] NSWSC 680

The application for interlocutory injunctive relief failed because the documents relied on did not come near being confidential information, any risk of serious harm was minimal given the confidential nature of Fair Work Commission files, the relevant agreements bound only the third plaintiff and Ms Bryant while the documents predated the third plaintiff's existence, and there was no evidence that any property in the documents had been transferred to the third plaintiff.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
09 May 2018
Procedural Posture
Application for Interlocutory Injunctive Relief / Duty List; Interlocutory Application
Outcome
Application for interlocutory injunctive relief dismissed, save for one non-contentious order; costs reserved.
Legal Topics
['interlocutory Injunction' 'use of Documents in Fair Work Commission Proceedings' 'confidential Information Clauses' 'delivery Up of Company Property' 'restrictive Covenant and Employee Intellectual Property Agreement']
['equity' 'employment' 'confidential Information' 'contract'] ['interlocutory Injunction' 'use of Documents in Fair Work Commission Proceedings' 'confidential Information Clauses' 'delivery Up of Company Property' 'restrictive Covenant and Employee Intellectual Property Agreement']

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 1 Authorities cited 2 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Procedural Posture

Application for Interlocutory Injunctive Relief / Duty List; Interlocutory Application

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether documents included by Ms Bryant in her Fair Work Commission application were confidential information of the plaintiffs under cl 13 of the letter of engagement or cl 4.3 of the restrictive agreement.' 'Whether the documents were property of the plaintiffs and subject to delivery up under cl 1.9 of the restrictive agreement.' 'Whether interlocutory injunctive relief should be granted requiring excision of the material from the Fair Work Commission documents and delivery up of other information or property.']

Ratio Decidendi

The application for interlocutory injunctive relief failed because the documents relied on did not come near being confidential information, any risk of serious harm was minimal given the confidential nature of Fair Work Commission files, the relevant agreements bound only the third plaintiff and Ms Bryant while the documents predated the third plaintiff's existence, and there was no evidence that any property in the documents had been transferred to the third plaintiff.

Court Disposition

Application for interlocutory injunctive relief dismissed, save for one non-contentious order; costs reserved.

Orders

  • ['Dismiss application for interlocutory injunctive relief.' 'Orders made in accordance with paras 1 to 4 as amended of the short minutes of order initialled by the judge and dated 09 May 2018.' 'Costs reserved.' 'Matter to be listed for directions at a convenient time.']