Filby v Teg Live Pty Ltd

The appellant, Mr Filby, brought a claim against the respondent, Teg Live Pty Ltd, alleging a breach of an equitable obligation of confidence. Mr Filby contended that confidential information he had provided to Teg Live during a meeting on 26 February 2013 was used by the respondent in devising an additional, free One Direction concert for Coles customers. This concert was part of a sponsorship arrangement between Teg Live and Coles for the 2013 Australian tour. The primary judge had dismissed Mr Filby's claim.

The appeal to the Court of Appeal concerned whether the primary judge had erred in several key findings. These included findings that the information conveyed by Mr Filby was inherently unspecific and a very general, inchoate idea, and that it was not received by Teg Live in circumstances importing an obligation of confidence. The appeal also questioned whether the primary judge erred in finding there was no misuse of the information. The Court of Appeal also considered the appellant's challenge to the primary judge's findings of fact, which were significantly influenced by the primary judge's assessment of witness credibility, and whether these findings were glaringly improbable or contrary to compelling inferences. Leave to appeal was granted as the appeal raised points of principle of some importance.

The Court of Appeal dismissed the appeal. The judges found that the primary judge had enjoyed significant advantages in assessing witness credibility, and that the appellant had not established that the primary judge's findings were glaringly improbable or contrary to compelling inferences. The Court upheld the primary judge's conclusion that the information provided by Mr Filby was too general and inchoate to be protected by an equitable obligation of confidence, and that it was not imparted in circumstances that would impose such an obligation. Consequently, there could be no breach of confidence.

The appeal was dismissed, and the appellant was ordered to pay the respondent's costs of the appeal.