In a recruitment-industry dispute, the plaintiffs sought to continue and expand interlocutory relief after obtaining an ex parte Anton Piller order and interim injunction against a former consultant and related defendants alleged to have used client and candidate information to compete.
The court held that the extraordinary Anton Piller remedy should not have been granted, found material non-disclosure on the ex parte motion, and concluded the allegedly confidential information was largely public, outdated, and of overstated value.
Applying the interlocutory injunction framework, the court found there may have been a serious issue to be tried, but no irreparable harm and no balance of convenience favouring injunctive relief.
The court also refused a sealing order, declined to schedule a contempt motion, dismissed the plaintiffs' motion, and granted the defendants' cross-motion.
