New Zealand Case Law: Decisions & Judgments

Topic

Breach of confidentiality

Legal area

Court

20 Jul 2022

MODA SYSTEMS NZ LTD v McLAREN SMART PROCESSING LTD [2022] NZHC 1743

Citation

[2022] NZHC 1743
Court

High Court

The Court held the amended counterclaim did not provide sufficient particulars. Because proof of sharing is a necessary element of the breach of confidence/copyright claims and identification of which components/arrangements and which confidential information or copyright works are relied on is essential, the first defendant must file and serve a more explicit amended counterclaim specifying for each listed diagram when, how, by whom and to whom it was shared (and identify any document effecting the sharing), and must identify for each listed drawing the confidential information alleged to ha…
13 May 2021

CREATIVE DEVELOPMENT SOLUTIONS LIMITED v CHORUS NEW ZEALAND LIMITED [2021] NZCA 178

Citation

[2021] NZCA 178
Court

Court of Appeal

Appeal dismissed. The Agreement encompassed protectable collocations of information but Chorus did not use Creative's confidential material as a springboard to breach the NDA; Chorus made a representation confined to the RBI2+ context and Creative reasonably relied on it, but Creative failed to prove any material detriment from that reliance at the liability hearing, so equitable estoppel was not established and no liability arose on the claims pursued on appeal.
13 Mar 2019

KRISTIN PIA CATO v MANAIA MEDIA LIMITED [2019] NZHC 440

Citation

[2019] NZHC 440
Court

High Court

The article was, as a matter of law, capable of bearing some of the pleaded defamatory meanings (notably that the plaintiff was responsible for releasing the settlement statement and that she may have breached confidentiality in doing so), but was not capable of bearing the pleaded meanings that she misused her position by favouring her mother's media outlet or concealed her relationship in the manner pleaded; the plaintiff must re‑plead to particularise the remaining claims.
20 Apr 2018

MCKAY & ORS v MARK ROBERT SANDMAN [2018] NZCA 103

Citation

[2018] NZAR 707
Court

Court of Appeal

The Court allowed the appeal and granted summary judgment for the firm because, on the evidence (notably the unchallenged detailed affidavit of the solicitor Ms Paul and attendant contemporaneous steps: independent advice, medical certificate and statutory declaration), the respondent could not prove the necessary dishonesty element of dishonest assistance by an objective standard; absent dishonesty the claim cannot succeed.
4 Dec 2015

CITY SALES LTD v CAMPBELL [2015] NZHC 3058

Citation

[2015] NZHC 3058
Court

High Court

The application for interim relief was refused because there was insufficient reliable evidence to establish a serious question that the respondent had misused the plaintiff's database, the confidentiality clause was ambiguous as to sale and purchase agreements, and the balance of convenience favoured the respondent; accordingly injunctive relief was not justified.
19 Jul 2012

STEWART V FRANMARA INC HC AK CIV-2011-404-2584

Citation

openlaw-e53087c6_4a33_4796_a299_c0d474f991a9.pdf
Court

High Court

The Court assumed jurisdiction to determine alleged infringement of the US patent because the defendant did not contest jurisdiction or challenge the patent's validity; damages are to be quantified under New Zealand law (lex fori) so US remedies for enhanced damages are not available; the Court declined to grant relief under the California statute for which no jurisdictional basis was shown.
21 May 2009

TRANSACTOR TECHNOLOGIES LTD & ANOR V EVOLUTION E-BUSINESS LTD & ANOR HC AK CIV-2008-404-008469

Citation

openlaw-58acb47d_a981_4570_8617_703edb96e69d.pdf
Court

High Court

The Court held the settlement between Transactor and Evolution was not sufficiently relevant to justify breaching confidentiality and made the Tomlin order; MarketSmart's application to discharge the search order failed because no mala fides, material non-disclosure or special circumstances were shown; Transactor was entitled to inspect relevant non-privileged documents seized under the search order and to access MarketSmart's CIS source code because PwC required assistance from Transactor staff to assess alleged incorporation of Thor; MarketSmart was ordered to file further affidavits comply…
3 Jul 2008

KOOLFOAM INDUSTRIES LTD V K BATH AND ANOR HC AK CIV 2007-404-004554

Citation

openlaw-a6b08470_2c2b_4823_87f2_cf60c5ed835d.pdf
Court

High Court

The court will give effect to a valid consensual settlement by discharging the interim injunction and substituting a consent injunction for a fixed term, and will not adjourn proceedings sine die where supervision of compliance with staged payments is required — instead the matter is to be placed for call before the Duty Judge in the week commencing 2 March 2009.