(1)Is the Earthquake Commission (EQC) entitled to a declaration that Mr Krieger disclosed information in circumstances that constituted a breach of confidence; and

(2)Should I issue permanent orders prohibiting any further disclosure of the information in question by anyone other than EQC.

EARTHQUAKE COMMISSION v KRIEGER [2013] NZHC 3140 [27 November 2013]

[2] I shall address these questions by explaining:

(1)       The context in which the questions arise. (2)   Mr Krieger’s role in the litigation.
(3)       The principles that govern the law of breach of confidence. (4)         The application of the law to the facts of this case.
(5)       Whether relief is necessary. (6) My conclusions.

Context

[3] EQC is a statutory body established by the Earthquake Commission Act 1993 (the Act). EQC administers insurance against damage caused by natural disasters.

[4] Those who have fire insurance for residential buildings and personal property are deemed to be insured under the Act against damage that is caused by natural disasters to residential buildings,1 residential land,2 and personal property.3 There are limitations and exceptions to the insurance cover provided under the Act but they are not relevant to the questions I have to consider.

[5] Premiums are paid to EQC by insurance companies, which provide fire insurance in relation to residential buildings and personal property. The premiums are set by regulations and become a debt due to the insurance company by the insured person.4 The commercial sensitivity of EQC’s business is illustrated by the fact that all information about the premiums which insurers pay to EQC is subject to
strict secrecy provisions, set out in s 25 of the Act.

1      Earthquake Commission Act 1993, s 18.
2      Section 19.
3      Section 20.
4      Section 23.

[6] On 4 September 2010 and 22 February 2011 Christchurch and its surrounding areas were devastated by powerful earthquakes. The second of those earthquakes caused the deaths of 185 people. Thousands of aftershocks accompanied both earthquakes which were New Zealand’s most expensive natural disasters and amongst the most costliest natural disasters to insurers world-wide.

[7] By September 2012 Fletcher EQR, an EQC contractor, had collated information relating to approximately 83,000 claims. This information was condensed by EQC into a spreadsheet which contained 30 “fields” of information about each claim. For present purposes, it is convenient to describe those fields under three headings:

(1)Information about individual claims. This information includes information that could easily lead to the identification of individuals. It includes a claimant’s suburb, street name and street number and it includes information about each individual insurance claim, including the estimated…

Grounds of appeal

[14] The appellant contends that the primary judge erred in finding that the respondent had discharged the onus of establishing the matters required under the relevant provision.

[15] It was submitted that his Honour failed to give adequate weight to the evidence of the second witness, and that the findings of fact were not reasonably open on the material before the Court.

[16] The respondent, for its part, submits that no error is disclosed, and that the conclusions reached were well within the range of outcomes available to the primary judge.

Consideration

[17] It is convenient to deal first with the question of construction, as the resolution of that issue informs the remaining grounds advanced by the appellant.

[18] For the reasons that follow, we are of the view that the appeal should be allowed in part and the matter remitted for further determination.

Continue reading Earthquake Commission v Krieger

Details

AGLC: Earthquake Commission v Krieger [2013] NZHC 3140
Case: [2013] NZHC 3140
Decision Date: 27 November 2013

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The case of Earthquake Commission v Krieger is a legal proceeding in New Zealand concerning a breach of confidence claim. The Earthquake Commission (EQC), a statutory body administering insurance against damage caused by natural disasters, sought a declaration that Marc Allen Krieger breached his obligation to keep confidential information from a spreadsheet containing details of insurance claims. The EQC also sought permanent orders prohibiting any further disclosure of the information by anyone other than EQC. The Court found that the information in the spreadsheet had the necessary quality of confidence, was imparted in circumstances importing an obligation of confidence, and there was an unauthorised use of the information. The Court held that the information in the spreadsheet is not information “relating to government” and EQC does not need to establish that restraint of publication is in the public interest. The Court also found that Mr Krieger's public interest defence was unsuccessful, and that restraining publication of the spreadsheet is a justifiable limitation on Mr Krieger’s right to freedom of expression. Consequently, the Court issued a declaration that Mr Krieger’s disclosure of the spreadsheet constituted a breach of his obligation to keep the information confidential and issued a permanent injunction restraining Mr Krieger from disclosing the information contained in the spreadsheet.

Orders