17 May 2006
NEWPORT V COBURN AND ORS CA CA234/04
- Citation
- openlaw-64c8c810_4468_499e_b66d_6c2250595cc4.pdf
- Court
- Court of Appeal
Appellant held to be an employee; for Leemings the evidence did not establish he knew representations were false and on the facts he merely conveyed employer‑prepared material without embellishment so mere conduit defence applied; for Coburns he knew claims of exclusive contracts were false and was knowingly concerned in ISL's contravention and thus liable under s 43(1)(d), but liability discounted to reflect his lesser role (reduced to NZD 5,000).