Private Research Ltd v Brosnan

• Jurisdiction: Ireland
• Judge: McCracken J.
• Judgment Date: 01 January 1996
• Neutral Citation: 1995 WJSC-HC 3144
• Docket Number: Record No. 229 C.A./1995,[1995 No. 299]
• Court: High Court
• Date: 01 January 1996

PRIVATE RESEARCH LTD v. BROSNAN

BETWEEN

PRIVATE RESEARCH LIMITED

PLAINTIFF

AND

PAUL BROSNAN AND NETWORK FINANCIAL SERVICESLIMITED

DEFENDANTS

1995 WJSC-HC 3144

Record No. 229 C.A./1995

THE HIGH COURT

Synopsis:

INJUNCTION

Interlocutory

Fair question - Convenience - Balance - Copyright - Infringement - Passing off - Plaintiff's publication of lists of company returns - Analysis of returns - Similar publication started by former employee of plaintiffs - Whether lists were a compilation - Interlocutory relief refused - Copyright Act, 1963, s. 2 - (1995/229 CA - McCracken J. - 1/6/95) 1995 1 IR 534 1996 1 ILRM 27

|Private Research Ltd. v. Brosnan|

WORDS AND PHRASES

"Compilation"

Company - Returns - Lists - Analysis - Publication - Restraint - (1995/229 CA - McCracken J. - 1/6/95)1995 1 I.R. 534 1996 1 ILRM 27

|Private Research Ltd. v. Brosnan|

Citations:

COPYRIGHT ACT 1963 S2

COPPINGER & SKONE JAMES ON COPYRIGHT 11ED PARA 90

1 Judgment of McCracken J.delivered on the 1st day of June, 1995.

2 This is an appeal from an Order of the President of the Circuit Court made on 4th May, 1995, whereby he granted certain interlocutory injunctions to the Plaintiff as follows:-

3 a "(a) Restraining the Defendants or either of them (whether acting by their directors, officers, servants or agents or any of them or otherwise howsoever) from passing off a Publication not of the Plaintiff or any colourable imitation of the Plaintiff's monthly publication based on the format of the Plaintiff's saidpublication.

4 (b) Restraining the Defendants or either of them (whether acting by their directors, officers, servants or agents or any of them or otherwise howsoever) from soliciting or attempting to solicit any of the Plaintiff's subscribers from the years 1993/1994 and1994/1995 as listed in the lists marked Annexe "A" and Annexe "B" annexed hereto, and forming part of this Order, for the purposes of any such publication or colourable imitationthereof.

5 (c) Restraining the Defendants or either of them (whether acting by their directors, officers, servants or agents or any of them or otherwise howsoever) from breaching the Plaintiff's copyright in the Plaintiff's monthly publication entitled "PrivateResearch".

6 (d) Restraining the first named Defendant from disclosing from memory and the Defendants or either of them (whether acting by their directors, officers, servants or agents or any of them or otherwise howsoever) from disclosing or using the Plaintiff's confidential list of subscribers from the years 1993/1994 and 1994/1995 whether based on an unauthorised copy of the Plaintiff's such lists as aforesaid or a copy made by the first named Defendant from his memory of the Plaintiff's aforesaid lists or otherwise howsoever for the purposes of any such publication or any colourable imitation thereof".

7 The Plaintiff publishes a monthly publication entitled "Private Research - Confidential Analysis of Corporate Performance", which each month lists all the annual returns filed in the Companies Office during the previous four weeks and then selects some two hundred companies for analysis. The particulars filed in the Companies Office for these companies are analysed and certain information taken from the Companies Office files is included in the publication in aformat which, by and large, is standard for each company, and lists certain specified information in a certain order. The publication is sold to subscribers, who now number some six hundred. These subscribers include many of the leading financial institutions and accountancy firms, and also a cross-section of businesses which are likely to have an interest in the financial affairs of companies. The publication is not on sale to the general public.

8 The Plaintiff employed the first Defendant as his marketing manager from November 1992 until February 1995, and it was his function to generate subscriptions for the publication. He resigned as of 13th February, 1995 and, together with others, set up the second Defendant which it is acknowledged intends to produce a similar publication, aimed at the same market, but which also intends to provide on-line computer services. The format which the second Defendant intends to use undoubtedly bears a similarity to that used by the Plaintiff although the actual companies analysed in any month will not necessarily be those chosen by thePlaintiff.

9 The second Defendant has circularised at least some of the Plaintiff's subscribers seeking subscriptions to the proposed publication, which is to be called "Financial Information Bulletin".

10 This is an application for an interlocutory injunction, and all that the Plaintiff has to satisfy me of is that there is a fair issue to be tried. The Plaintiff's claim comes under three headings, which I would propose to consider individually, namely, breach of copyright, passing off and misuse of confidential information.

1. Breach of Copyright

1...