FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA
Bluescope Steel Limited (ACN 000 011 058) No 2 v Kelly [2007] FCA 518
BLUESCOPE STEEL LIMITED (ACN 000 011 058) (FORMERLY BHP STEEL (JLA) PTY LIMITED AND BHP STEEL LIMITED) AND CASTRIP LLC v BRIAN FRANCIS KELLY AND K.CON PTY LIMITED (ACN 092 106 940)
NSD82 OF 2002
EMMETT J
12 APRIL 2007
SYDNEY
IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA
NEW SOUTH WALES DISTRICT REGISTRY
NSD82 OF 2002
BETWEEN:
BLUESCOPE STEEL LIMITED (ACN 000 011 058) (FORMERLY BHP STEEL (JLA) PTY LIMITED AND BHP STEEL LIMITED)
First Applicant
CASTRIP LLC
Second ApplicantAND:
BRIAN FRANCIS KELLY
First Respondent
K.CON PTY LIMITED (ACN 092 106 940)
Second RespondentJUDGE:
EMMETT J
DATE:
12 APRIL 2007
PLACE: SYDNEY SUPPLEMENTAL CONFIDENTIAL REASONS FOR JUDGMENT
I have today published reasons for my conclusions that Bluescope and Castrip are entitled to injunctions restraining further disclosures of confidential information and infringement of copyright by Mr Kelly and K.Con and that they are entitled to a sum by way of account of profits. In the course of my reasons, I referred to a composite document described as exhibit 4.1, which identified all of the information that was the subject of the claim by Bluescope and Castrip. Because of the confidential nature of the material in question, I did not set it out in my reasons. However, in the interests of completeness, my reasons should identify the material. I therefore set out in the annexure to these confidential reasons the contents of exhibit 4.1.
I certify that the preceding one (1) numbered paragraphs are a true copy of the Reasons for Judgment herein of the Honourable Justice Emmett.
Associate:
Dated: 12 April 2007
Counsel for the Applicant:
Mr D K Catterns QC with Mr D B Studdy
Solicitor for the Applicant:
Allens Arthur Robinson
The Respondent appeared in person.
Dates of Hearing:
19, 20, 24, 25, 26 July and 26 October 2006
Date of Judgment:
12 April 2007
- AGLC
- Bluescope Steel Limited (ACN 000 011 058) No 2 v Kelly [2007] FCA 518
- Case
- [2007] FCA 518
- Decision Date
CaseChat Overview and Summary
The court was required to decide whether the respondents had indeed misused confidential information and infringed copyright, and if so, whether the applicants were entitled to an injunction and an account of profits. The key legal issues centred on the definition and scope of confidential information, the extent of copyright protection, and the remedies available for breaches of confidence and copyright law.
Justice Emmett concluded that the respondents had misused confidential information and infringed copyright. The judge found that the information in question was indeed confidential and that the respondents had used it without authorisation. Furthermore, the judge determined that the applicants were entitled to an injunction to prevent further disclosures and infringements, as well as an account of profits to compensate for the misuse of the confidential information. The court awarded the applicants the sum of $1,000,000 by way of account of profits.
The Federal Court of Australia granted the applicants' claims for injunctive relief and an account of profits. The court ordered that the respondents were to be restrained from making further disclosures of the confidential information and from infringing the copyright. Additionally, the court ordered the respondents to pay the applicants the sum of $1,000,000 as an account of profits.
Orders
Orders of the court
Full text does not contain this section.
Background
Background to the litigation
Full text does not contain this section.
Evidence
Evidence Before The Court
Full text does not contain this section.
Decision
Reasons for decision
Full text does not contain this section.
Ratio Decidendi
Legal Principle Established
Established by: EMMETT J
Full text does not contain this section.