In Norman South Pty Ltd & Anor v da Silva [2012] VSC 477 the Victorian Supreme Court considered the operation of a confidentiality clause and a claim for breach of confidence relying upon the principles set out in Giller v Procopets (misuse of private information).

FACTS

Dr Geoffrey Edelsten (“Edelsten”), the second plaintiff, and Ms Stacey da Silva (“da Silva”) met on the internet site www.sugardaddy.com.  They met on line, spoke by phone and met in March this year in Florida, USA [2]. Edelsten through the 1st plaintiff transferred $US5,000 to the defendant.  The plaintiffs claim the money was a loan paid pursuant to an agreement which had a confidentiality clause which provided:

The contents of this Agreement and any dealings including emails, texts or any other form of communication between Ms da Silva and Norman South Pty Ltd, and/or Geoffrey Edelsten, will remain confidential and shall not be divulged unless Norman South Pty Ltd and Geoffrey Edelsten waives this right by provision of a dispensation in writing.

The Defendant initially argued that the money was a gift however after cross examination of de Silva her counsel conceded the existence of an agreement [4]. The issue at final submission was whether the loan agreement contained the confidentiality agreement as alleged.

The plaintiffs pleaded a breach of contract and the equitable claim of a breach of confidence [5].  They sought damages, Read the rest of this entry »