Yew Huoi, How & Associates | Leading Malaysia Law Firm

Menu

TORT – BREAKING CONFIDENTIALITY – COURT CRACKS DOWN ON INSIDER LEAKS AND CORPORATE CONSPIRACY

Summary and Facts

Gotham Solutions Sdn Bhd, a provider of security technology, alleged that two former employees, Arthur Fleck and Harley Quinn, unlawfully disclosed confidential information to a competitor, Wayne Enterprises Ltd, a well-known international firm. Gotham claimed this disclosure breached employment contracts, fiduciary duties, and amounted to a conspiracy to harm its business interests. The information disclosed reportedly included Gotham’s strategic plans, pricing models, and key client data.

Legal Issues

  • Whether the disclosed information was confidential and belonged to Gotham Solutions?
  • Whether the defendants engaged in a conspiracy to damage Gotham Solutions’ business interests?
  • Whether the former employees breached their fiduciary duties and employment contracts?

Court Findings

  • The court found that the information shared by Arthur Fleck and Harley Quinn with Wayne Enterprises Ltd was indeed confidential. Evidence showed that sensitive business details were shared without Gotham’s consent. The defendants’ claim that the information was public was dismissed for lack of supporting proof.
  • The court concluded that the defendants conspired to harm Gotham’s business by providing confidential information, which enabled Wayne Enterprises to win contracts previously held by Gotham Solutions, including major deals with Arkham City and Bludhaven Corp.
  • Both Arthur Fleck and Harley Quinn were found to have breached their employment contracts and fiduciary obligations by disclosing proprietary information to a direct competitor.

Practical Implications

This case emphasises the importance of clear confidentiality clauses in employment contracts and the severe consequences of breaching them. Malaysian businesses should ensure that employees understand these obligations, as unauthorized disclosures can lead to substantial legal and financial repercussions. Additionally, competitors who knowingly benefit from such information may also be held accountable. This decision reinforces the court’s commitment to protecting competitive integrity and business interests.

Reference Cases

  • Flowbird Malaysia Sdn Bhd v Alain Taher Osterlind & Ors [2024] 11 MLJ 235
Back to Latest Legal Updates

Recent Post

REGULATIONS – GENERAL AGREEMENT ON TARIFFS AND TRADE (GATT 1947 ) – ARTICLE I

This legal update explores key provisions of the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (GATT 1947), focusing on Article I (Most-Favoured-Nation Treatment), Article II (Schedules of Concessions), Article XX (General Exceptions), and Article XXI (Security Exceptions). Article I mandates that any trade advantage granted by one contracting party to another must be extended unconditionally to all other parties. Article II ensures that imported goods from contracting parties receive treatment no less favourable than that outlined in agreed schedules, while also regulating permissible taxes and charges. Articles XX and XXI provide exceptions for measures necessary to protect public morals, health, security interests, and compliance with domestic laws. The provisions reflect the foundational principles of non-discrimination, transparency, and fair trade, while allowing for limited, well-defined exceptions. This summary is intended to provide a concise reference for businesses and legal practitioners involved in international trade law.

Read More »
3 April ,2025 No Comments

ROAD ACCIDENT – INSURANCE COMPANY STRIKES BACK: HIGH COURT OVERTURNS ROAD ACCIDENT CLAIM

When a motorcyclist claimed he was knocked down in an accident, the Sessions Court ruled in his favor, holding the other rider fully liable. But the insurance company wasn’t convinced. They appealed, arguing that there was no proof of a collision and even raised suspicions of fraud. The High Court took a closer look – and in a dramatic turn, overturned the decision, dismissed the claim, and awarded RM60,000 in costs to the insurer. This case is a stark reminder that in court, assumptions don’t win cases – evidence does.

Read More »
24 February ,2025 No Comments

CHARTERPARTY – LIEN ON SUB-FREIGHTS: CLARIFYING OWNERS’ RIGHTS AGAINST SUB-CHARTERERS

In Marchand Navigation Co v Olam Global Agri Pte Ltd and Anor [2025] 1 Lloyd’s Rep 92, the Singapore High Court upheld the owners’ right to enforce a lien on sub-freights under Clause 18 of the NYPE 1946 charterparty, ruling that the phrase ‘any amounts due under this charter’ was broad enough to cover unpaid bunker costs. Despite an arbitration clause between the owners and charterers, the sub-charterer was obligated to honor the lien, as it was not a party to the arbitration agreement. This decision reinforces that a properly exercised lien on sub-freights can be an effective tool for owners to recover unpaid sums, even in the presence of disputes between charterers and sub-charterers.

Read More »
24 February ,2025 No Comments

SHIP SALE – LOSING THE DEAL, LOSING THE DAMAGES? THE LILA LISBON CASE AND THE LIMITS OF MARKET LOSS RECOVERY

In “The Lila Lisbon” [2025] 1 Lloyd’s Rep 101, the court ruled that a buyer cancelling under Clause 14 of the Norwegian Salesform Memorandum of Agreement is not automatically entitled to loss of bargain damages unless the seller is in repudiatory breach. The case clarifies that failing to deliver by the cancellation date does not constitute non-delivery under the English Sale of Goods Act 1979, as the clause grants the buyer a discretionary right rather than imposing a firm obligation on the seller. This decision highlights the importance of precise contract drafting, particularly in ship sale agreements, where buyers must ensure that compensation for market loss is explicitly provided for.

Read More »
24 February ,2025 No Comments

CRIMINAL – KIDNAPPING – NO ESCAPE FROM JUSTICE: COURT UPHOLDS LIFE SENTENCE IN HIGH-PROFILE KIDNAPPING CASE

A 10-year-old child was abducted outside a tuition center, held captive, and released only after a RM1.75 million ransom was paid. The appellants were arrested following investigations, with their statements leading to the recovery of a portion of the ransom money. Despite denying involvement, they were convicted under the Kidnapping Act 1961 and sentenced to life imprisonment and ten strokes of the whip. Their appeal challenged the identification process, the validity of the charge, and the admissibility of evidence, but the court found the prosecution’s case to be strong, ruling that the appellants had acted in furtherance of a common intention and were equally liable for the crime.

Read More »
24 February ,2025 No Comments
en_USEN
zh_TWZH ms_MYMY en_USEN
× Contact Us