The Rice Daubney Group (NSW) Pty Limited v KEANE

The Rice Daubney Group (NSW) Pty Limited (the applicant) sought leave to appeal against a decision of the Supreme Court of New South Wales, which had dismissed its application for an interlocutory injunction. The dispute concerned alleged breaches of confidentiality and copyright by the respondent, Mr. Keane, in relation to architectural plans and designs developed by the applicant. The applicant contended that Mr. Keane, a former employee, had unlawfully retained and used confidential information and copyrighted material belonging to the applicant after his employment ceased.

The Court of Appeal was required to determine whether the primary judge erred in refusing to grant an interlocutory injunction. Specifically, the court had to consider whether the applicant had established a sufficient likelihood of success on the merits of its claims for breach of confidence and copyright infringement, and whether the balance of convenience favoured the grant of an injunction to preserve the status quo pending a final determination of the proceedings.

In its reasoning, the Court of Appeal applied the established principles for the grant of interlocutory injunctions, including the two-stage test articulated in *Australian Broadcasting Corporation v O'Neill*. This involves assessing whether there is a "serious question to be tried" and, if so, determining where the balance of convenience lies. The court found that the applicant had not demonstrated a sufficiently strong case to warrant the grant of an interlocutory injunction, particularly in relation to the alleged copyright infringement. The court also considered the potential prejudice to the respondent if an injunction were granted and the applicant ultimately failed in its claim.

Consequently, the Court of Appeal dismissed the application for leave to appeal, upholding the primary judge's decision to refuse the interlocutory injunction.