Pro Arc International Pty Limited trading as World Gym Australia v Reddington

Pro Arc International Pty Limited, trading as World Gym Australia, brought proceedings against Reddington, alleging breaches of fiduciary duty, unauthorised use of confidential information, and interference with contractual relations. The case was heard in the Supreme Court of Queensland. The plaintiff sought interlocutory relief to restrain the defendants from operating the gym facility and to appoint a manager for the gym, while the defendants argued against such relief.

The court was required to determine whether the plaintiff had established a serious question to be tried and whether the balance of convenience favoured the grant of an injunction. The court also considered whether damages would be an adequate remedy for the plaintiff and the potential hardship to third parties if an injunction was granted. The court had to weigh the risk to the plaintiff's reputation and potential loss of membership against the hardship that might be caused to the gym's members, employees, and contractors if the injunction was granted.

The court found that while the plaintiff had established a serious question to be tried, the balance of convenience did not favour the grant of an injunction to restrain the defendants from operating the gym. The court concluded that damages would be an adequate remedy for the plaintiff. However, the court granted the plaintiff's application to appoint a manager for the gym facility. The court reasoned that this measure would protect the plaintiff's interests without causing undue hardship to the gym's members, employees, and contractors.

The court ordered that the plaintiff was to appoint a manager for the gym facility, while the interlocutory relief sought to restrain the defendants from operating the gym was refused. The final hearing on the liability of the defendants was set to proceed in four weeks' time.