The plaintiff real estate agents, who were the applicants, had sued their former employees for misuse of confidential information, and breach of restraints of trade. They sought further disclosure under rule 223(4)(b)(i) of the Uniform Civil Procedure Rules 1999 (Qld) (“UCPR”). In particular they sought disclosure of the defendants’ CRM database, and material from the defendants’ computers and mobile phones, none of which had been disclosed. The plaintiffs sought to have an independent computer expert appointed to take forensic images and search for relevant information. The defendants resisted this, including by way of arguing that the client information was not confidential. Brown J found there was an objective likelihood that the defendants had failed to provide proper disclosure, but because of the intrusive nature and the cost of appointing an independent expert, ordered that instead the parties confer about orders that would require the defendants to undertake word searches of the database and their electronic devices, and then provide further disclosure.
Shane Monks appeared for the applicants, instructed by Jemmeson & Fisher Solicitors.
The judgment is published here.
