McHenry Software Inc. v. ARAS 360 Incorporated

McHenry Software Inc. v. ARAS 360 Incorporated

McHenry failed to meet the Sierra Club necessity and proportionality test because the asserted risk was not real and substantial: the relevant facts and documents were already public due to McHenry's filings in U.S. proceedings, the Award did not disclose trade secrets, and the claimed commercial interest was private rather than a public interest in confidentiality; accordingly no sealing order was justified and the applications were dismissed with costs to ARAS.

Citation
2014 BCSC 1485
Parties
Petitioner (s144039); Respondent (s144050): McHenry Software Inc.; Respondent (s144039); Petitioner (s144050): ARAS 360 Incorporated (also known as ARAS 360 Technologies Inc.)
Court
Supreme Court of British Columbia
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
7 August 2014
Procedural Posture
Appeal of Arbitration Award; Related Applications for Sealing and Confidentiality Orders / Application Hearing and Reasons for Judgment (applications Dismissed)
Outcome
Both sealing applications dismissed.
Legal Topics
Sealing Orders, Open Court Principle, Confidentiality of Arbitration, Sierra Club Test, Commercial Interests
Source Language
English
Civil Procedure Arbitration Confidentiality Intellectual Property (copyright) Commercial Law Sealing Orders Open Court Principle Confidentiality of Arbitration +2 more

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Legal principles 6 Authorities cited 6 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

McHenry Software Inc.

Petitioner (s144039); Respondent (s144050)

ARAS 360 Incorporated (also known as ARAS 360 Technologies Inc.)

Respondent (s144039); Petitioner (s144050)

Procedural Posture

Appeal of Arbitration Award; Related Applications for Sealing and Confidentiality Orders / Application Hearing and Reasons for Judgment (applications Dismissed)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether a sealing order for the Arbitration Award was necessary to prevent a real and substantial risk to an important commercial interest
  2. 2 Whether the Arbitration Award disclosed trade secrets or confidential commercial information requiring protection
  3. 3 Whether prior public filings in U.S. proceedings defeated the need for sealing in British Columbia court proceedings

Ratio Decidendi

McHenry failed to meet the Sierra Club necessity and proportionality test because the asserted risk was not real and substantial: the relevant facts and documents were already public due to McHenry's filings in U.S. proceedings, the Award did not disclose trade secrets, and the claimed commercial interest was private rather than a public interest in confidentiality; accordingly no sealing order was justified and the applications were dismissed with costs to ARAS.

Court Disposition

Both sealing applications dismissed.

Orders

  • Sealing orders denied; Arbitration Award not sealed
  • Costs to ARAS in any event of the cause