Previous Section | Table of Contents | Next Section
McVey v Atlas Securities Ltd
20 Jun 2007, J Crichton, CA 66/07, (6 pages)
INJUNCTION - Interim reinstatement - Applicant employed on fixed term agreement to complete opening of bar - Initial term three months, then extended as project not finished - Genuine reason for fixed term - Whether applicant offered and accepted permanent position - Documentary evidence suggested permanent position contemplated in future - Evidence enough to meet low threshold of arguable case test - Balance of convenience favoured respondent - Applicant in other employment - No clear role to return to - Respondent would have to effectively create position - Overall justice did not favour applicant - Untested evidence suggested dysfunctional working relationship between applicant and respondent's only employee, and stakeholders - Reinstatement would require resolution of relationship problem - Interim reinstatement declined - Substantive matter transferred to another Authority member who could offer parties earlier dates - Hospitality Director
Result: Application dismissed ; Costs reserved
Petersons Global Sales Ltd & Anor v Peterson & Anor
11 Jun 2007, D King, AA 173/07, (2 pages)
INTERIM INJUNCTION - Record of oral determination - Restraint of trade - Application for injunctions preventing respondents from displaying prototype saw at Hamilton Field Days - Applicants claimed respondents took confidential information and trade secrets and used them to develop prototype - Respondents claimed entitled to information and to develop prototype - Clearly arguable case - Applicants stood to lose rights to develop and market saw permanently - Applicants would suffer temporary setback - Overall justice of case favoured applicants - Injunctions ordered
Result: Application granted ; Orders accordingly ; Costs reserved
Urlwin McDonald and Clients Ltd v Boyle
6 Aug 2007, P Montgomery, CA 92/07, (4 pages)
INJUNCTION – Applicant alleged respondent solicited business of three significant clients for his own company while still an employee – Respondent denied breaching obligations to applicant – Both parties gave undertaking as to damages – Respondent conceded arguable case – Submitted would be prevented from earning living if injunction granted, and failure to hold status quo ran risk of causing demise of his business – Appeared clients recently acquired by applicant, so any financial loss predominantly future loss – Any loss to applicant could be easily identified and damages would be sufficient remedy – Loss could be constrained by setting prompt fixture for substantive hearing – Balance of convenience favoured respondent – Respondent’s defence appeared relatively strong, while applicant’s affidavits indicated some inconsistencies – Overall justice favoured respondent – Application for interim relief declined – Parties directed to mediation
Result: Application dismissed ; Parties directed to mediation ; No order for costs
Previous Section | Table of Contents | Next Section
