Cadgroup Australia Pty Ltd v Snowball [2016] NSWSC 22

Cadgroup Australia Pty Ltd v Snowball [2016] NSWSC 22

The interlocutory injunctions sought were refused because the contractual restraints as drafted were too wide in scope and duration to be supported by any protectable interest, were likely void for public policy, and could not be adequately read down; Cadgroup failed to particularise its confidential information...

Source-derived case information.

Parties
Plaintiff: Cadgroup Australia Pty Ltd; Defendant: Lisa Snowball
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
04 February 2016
Procedural Posture
Interlocutory Application / Judgment on Application for Interlocutory Relief
Outcome
Application for interlocutory injunctions declined; certain undertakings by defendant accepted; costs awarded to defendant.
Legal Topics
Equitable Remedies, Injunctions, Restraint of Trade, Confidential Information
Equity Employment Law Equitable Remedies Injunctions Restraint of Trade Confidential Information

Source-derived case record

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 4 Authorities cited 22 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Cadgroup Australia Pty Ltd

Plaintiff

Lisa Snowball

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Interlocutory Application / Judgment on Application for Interlocutory Relief

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether interlocutory relief restraining the defendant from working with a competitor is appropriate
  2. 2 Whether the contractual restraints are reasonable or void for public policy
  3. 3 Whether the defendant breached confidentiality or non-solicitation obligations

Ratio Decidendi

The interlocutory injunctions sought were refused because the contractual restraints as drafted were too wide in scope and duration to be supported by any protectable interest, were likely void for public policy, and could not be adequately read down; Cadgroup failed to particularise its confidential information sufficiently to warrant an injunction; the undertakings offered by Ms Snowball provided sufficient protection on an interlocutory basis.

Court Disposition

Application for interlocutory injunctions declined; certain undertakings by defendant accepted; costs awarded to defendant.

Orders

  • Undertakings offered by the defendant (Ms Snowball), as amended, to be accepted by the Court.
  • Application otherwise dismissed.