Pintorex Ltd v Keyvanfar & Ors [2013] EWPCC 36 (30 July 2013)

Pintorex Ltd v Keyvanfar & Ors [2013] EWPCC 36 (30 July 2013)

The First Defendant misused the Claimant's confidential information by copying the Sage database and soliciting business from Plasfab and Office Depot using that information. The Second Defendant is vicariously liable as the First Defendant acted as its agent. The Third Defendant is not liable as there was insufficient evidence of knowledge or dishonesty. Estoppel defence fails due to lack of detrimental reliance and insufficient factual basis.

Citation
[2013] EWPCC 36
Parties
Claimant: Pintorex Limited; First Defendant: Nasser Keyvanfar (a.k.a. Hamid Kay); Second Defendant: Parax Office Limited; Third Defendant: Djahanshah Akhavane-Zandjani (a.k.a. John Zanjani)
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
30 July 2013
Procedural Posture
Civil Breach of Confidence / Judgment After Trial
Outcome
Claim succeeds against First and Second Defendants; dismissed against Third Defendant.
Legal Topics
Breach of Confidence, Misuse of Confidential Information, Vicarious Liability, Director Liability, Estoppel, Database Right
Commercial Law Employment Law Intellectual Property Breach of Confidence Misuse of Confidential Information Vicarious Liability Director Liability Estoppel +1 more

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 3 Authorities cited 9 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Pintorex Limited

Claimant

Nasser Keyvanfar (a.k.a. Hamid Kay)

First Defendant

Parax Office Limited

Second Defendant

Djahanshah Akhavane-Zandjani (a.k.a. John Zanjani)

Third Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil Breach of Confidence / Judgment After Trial

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Did the First Defendant misuse the Claimant's confidential information?
  2. 2 Is the Second Defendant vicariously liable for the First Defendant's misuse?
  3. 3 Is the Third Defendant personally liable for misuse of confidential information?

Ratio Decidendi

The First Defendant misused the Claimant's confidential information by copying the Sage database and soliciting business from Plasfab and Office Depot using that information. The Second Defendant is vicariously liable as the First Defendant acted as its agent. The Third Defendant is not liable as there was insufficient evidence of knowledge or dishonesty. Estoppel defence fails due to lack of detrimental reliance and insufficient factual basis.

Court Disposition

Claim succeeds against First and Second Defendants; dismissed against Third Defendant.

Orders

  • First and Second Defendants liable for misuse of confidential information.
  • Third Defendant acquitted of liability.