LiveBetter Services Ltd v Quarmby [2020] NSWSC 7

LiveBetter Services Ltd v Quarmby [2020] NSWSC 7

LiveBetter established a prima facie case that Mr Quarmby breached duties of fidelity, contractual obligations not to solicit LiveBetter clients during employment, and obligations concerning confidential information, and that New Directions was knowingly involved; damages were not shown to be an adequate remedy. However, the Court refused to grant the interlocutory injunction at that stage because the evidence did not place the Court in a proper position to assess the consequences of granting or refusing the injunction for the disabled clients whose accommodation and services could be affected, and those third-party interests were potentially determinative of the balance of convenience.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
16 January 2020
Procedural Posture
Equity Proceedings Seeking Injunctive Relief and Damages Concerning Alleged Breaches of Employment Obligations, Confidentiality, Restraint of Trade and Corporations Act Duties / Interlocutory Application for Injunction Heard on the First Return Date of the Summons
Outcome
Interlocutory injunctive relief was not granted at that stage; the parties were invited to provide further evidence and submissions concerning the interests of LiveBetter's clients and the terms of any interlocutory order.
Legal Topics
['interlocutory Injunction' 'balance of Convenience' 'former Employee Obligations' 'confidentiality Clause' 'restraint of Trade Clause' 'duty of Fidelity' 'third Party Interests in Injunctive Relief']
['equity' 'employment Law' 'restraint of Trade' 'confidential Information' 'corporations Law'] ['interlocutory Injunction' 'balance of Convenience' 'former Employee Obligations' 'confidentiality Clause' 'restraint of Trade Clause' 'duty of Fidelity' 'third Party Interests in Injunctive Relief']

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

Equity Proceedings Seeking Injunctive Relief and Damages Concerning Alleged Breaches of Employment Obligations, Confidentiality, Restraint of Trade and Corporations Act Duties / Interlocutory Application for Injunction Heard on the First Return Date of the Summons

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether LiveBetter established a prima facie case or serious question to be tried that Mr Quarmby breached duties of fidelity, confidentiality obligations or restraint obligations by establishing New Directions and soliciting LiveBetter clients.' 'Whether hearsay evidence could be relied on in support of the interlocutory application.' "Whether the restraint in clause 13 of Mr Quarmby's employment contract was enforceable despite having no temporal or geographical limitation." 'Whether damages would be an adequate remedy for LiveBetter if interlocutory relief were refused.' "Whether the balance of convenience favoured granting interlocutory relief, including having regard to the interests of LiveBetter's disabled clients as third parties."]

Ratio Decidendi

LiveBetter established a prima facie case that Mr Quarmby breached duties of fidelity, contractual obligations not to solicit LiveBetter clients during employment, and obligations concerning confidential information, and that New Directions was knowingly involved; damages were not shown to be an adequate remedy. However, the Court refused to grant the interlocutory injunction at that stage because the evidence did not place the Court in a proper position to assess the consequences of granting or refusing the injunction for the disabled clients whose accommodation and services could be affected, and those third-party interests were potentially determinative of the balance of convenience.

Court Disposition

Interlocutory injunctive relief was not granted at that stage; the parties were invited to provide further evidence and submissions concerning the interests of LiveBetter's clients and the terms of any interlocutory order.

Orders

  • ['The Court published the reasons for judgment.' 'The parties were invited to respond in accordance with [103] and to make submissions as to the terms of any interlocutory order if the Court is persuaded to make such an order.' "The Court indicated an inclination that the costs of the interlocutory application...