Intech Inc v Baker

IN THE HIGH COURT OF NEW ZEALAND AUCKLAND REGISTRY

I TE KŌTI MATUA O AOTEAROA TĀMAKI MAKAURAU ROHE

CIV 2021-404-002270

[2022] NZHC 2146

BETWEEN

INTECH INC

First Plaintiff

AND

WAREHAM STEAMSHIP CORPORATION

Second Plaintiff

AND

ACRA-CUT INC

Third Plaintiff

AND

JOHN BAKER

Fourth Defendant

AND

ANURA LIMITED

(formerly named ORION MARINE LIMITED) First Defendant

continued overleaf…

Tele Conference:

22 August 2022

Counsel:

C Elliott QC and K Crossland for the Plaintiff

G Illingworth QC and A Hyde for the First, Second, Third & Fourth Defendants
G Arthur QC for Non-party

Judgment:

26 August 2022

JUDGMENT OF VAN BOHEMEN J

[on application by non-party for access to Court documents]

This judgment was delivered by me on 26 August 2022 at 2.00pm Pursuant to Rule 11.5 of the High Court Rules

…………………………

Registrar/Deputy Registrar

INTECH INC v WAREHAM STEAMSHIP CORPORATION [on application by non-party for access to Court documents] [2022] NZHC 2146 [26 August 2022]

continued from previous page…

AND

ZHANG YUN

Second Defendant

AND

DARREN PAUL LEYBOURNE

Third Defendant

AND

VLADAN ZUBCIC

Fourth Defendant

AND

STRYDA MARINE LIMITED

Fifth Defendant

AND

WARREN FARR

Sixth Defendant

Solicitors/Counsel:

C Elliott QC, Auckland

G M Illingworth QC, Auckland Shieff Angland Lawyers, Auckland Heritage Law, Auckland
Keegan Alexander, Auckland Goodwin Turner, Auckland

Introduction

[1]                   Sealegs International Ltd (Sealegs) applies, pursuant to rr 8 and 11 of the Senior Courts (Access to Court Documents) Rules 2017 (“Access to Documents Rules”), for access to Court documents in this proceeding.

[2]                   The plaintiffs in the present proceeding (“the Intech proceeding”) are three United States companies controlled by the recently added fourth plaintiff, John (Jack) Baker. The defendants are Anura Ltd (formerly Orion Marine Ltd) (“Orion”), and Zhang Yun, Darryl Leybourne and Vladan Zubcic, who are principals and employees of Orion.1

[3]                   Sealegs, which is not a party to the Intech proceeding, seeks access to all documents other than documents classified as confidential by any of the parties.

[4]The plaintiffs support the Sealegs application. The defendants oppose.

Relevant background

[5]                   As set out in my judgment of 25 March 2022 declining the plaintiffs’ application for injunctive relief in the Intech proceeding, some of the plaintiffs’ claims against the defendants relate to a proceeding brought by Sealegs over the defendants’ manufacture and production of Orion’s S25 amphibious system. Sealegs alleged the S25 infringed its copyright in its own amphibious system.2

[6]                   On 19 December 2016, the High Court granted Sealegs an interim injunction restraining Orion and the others from acts that would infringe Sealegs’ claimed copyright.3

[7]                   On 12 July 2018, the High Court granted a permanent injunction preventing Orion and others from manufacturing the S25.4

1      The term “defendants” is used to refer only to the first to fourth defendants. The fifth and sixth defendants have taken no part in the proceeding to date.

2      Intech Inc v Anura Ltd [2022] NZHC 574, see especially at [56] – [65].

3      Sealegs International Ltd v Zhang [2016] NZHC 3143 at [47].

4      Sealegs International Ltd v Zhang [2018] NZHC…