Tyco (Australia) Pty Ltd T/AS ADT Security v Signature Security Group Pty Ltd (No 6) [2010] FCA 1322

Tyco (Australia) Pty Ltd T/AS ADT Security v Signature Security Group Pty Ltd (No 6) [2010] FCA 1322

Although Signature's nominated officers might assist in testing Mr Whelan's evidence, Signature had not shown that disclosure to them was necessary or that reasonable alternative avenues, such as use of an independent third party, had been pursued; the material showed only a vaguely articulated concern, so the Court would not require Tyco to disclose sensitive commercial information to senior officers of its trade rival.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
03 December 2010
Procedural Posture
Interlocutory Applications Concerning a Confidentiality Régime / Reasons and Orders on Applications to Extend and Vary Confidentiality Orders
Outcome
Signature's proposed variation permitting disclosure of Mr Whelan's affidavit to its senior finance officers was not granted on the material before the Court; parties were directed to bring in short minutes and Signature was ordered to pay Tyco's costs of the applications.
Legal Topics
['confidentiality Régime' 'sensitive Commercial Information' 'access to Affidavit Evidence' 'trade Rivals' 'costs']
['civil Procedure' 'confidentiality' 'evidence'] ['confidentiality Régime' 'sensitive Commercial Information' 'access to Affidavit Evidence' 'trade Rivals' 'costs']

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

Interlocutory Applications Concerning a Confidentiality Régime / Reasons and Orders on Applications to Extend and Vary Confidentiality Orders

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ["Whether the confidentiality régime should be extended to Mr Potter's report and the affidavits of Mr Whelan and Ms Bloye." "Whether the confidentiality régime should be varied to permit Signature to show Mr Whelan's affidavit to its Group General Manager (Finance) and Group Financial Analyst if they proffer confidentiality undertakings." "Whether Signature had established that disclosure of Tyco's sensitive commercial information to senior officers of its trade rival was necessary for Signature to defend itself."]

Ratio Decidendi

Although Signature's nominated officers might assist in testing Mr Whelan's evidence, Signature had not shown that disclosure to them was necessary or that reasonable alternative avenues, such as use of an independent third party, had been pursued; the material showed only a vaguely articulated concern, so the Court would not require Tyco to disclose sensitive commercial information to senior officers of its trade rival.

Court Disposition

Signature's proposed variation permitting disclosure of Mr Whelan's affidavit to its senior finance officers was not granted on the material before the Court; parties were directed to bring in short minutes and Signature was ordered to pay Tyco's costs of the applications.

Orders

  • ['The parties bring in short minutes of order consistent with these reasons within seven days.' 'The first respondent bear the costs of the applicant on the various applications.']