Three aviation execs wait to face claims they used trade secrets to set up a rival firm
Ex-Ryanair finance boss Howard Millar and two fellow Stellwagen Capital directors deny any wrongdoing.
A HIGH COURT injunction bid from a group of aviation leasing companies against three of its former executives have been resolved.
But the main case, involving allegations that the trio used trade secrets from their former employer in order to establish a competitor firm, continues.
The injunctions had been sought by a group of companies, including Stellwagen Capital, Seraph Aviation Management and Guardian Holdings, against former Stellwagen Group chief operating officer, Howard Millar, and two other former directors, Edward Coughlan and Edward Hansom.
The Irish and US-based aviation leasing group claims the three had been trying to set up a rival $100 million company using confidential information taken from their former employer.
Millar joined the company after more than two decades at Ryanair, where he for a period served as the budget airline’s finance boss and deputy CEO.
Last month the company obtained temporary High Court orders preventing the three defendants from using, disposing of or dealing with confidential information and requiring them to comply with non-compete and non-solicitation clauses in their contracts.
Injunction
The three, who deny any wrongdoing, had opposed the group’s application to have an injunction kept in place until the full hearing of the dispute.
That application was due to be heard before the High Court earlier this week but was adjourned to allow talks between the parties.
Today, Mr Justice Paul Gilligan was informed by Rossa Fanning SC, appearing for the aviation group, that the injunction proceedings could be struck out after certain undertakings had been offered by the defendants.
The court also heard that all the parties were consenting to the course of action.
Seeking the injunction, Stellwagen founder and chief executive, Douglas L. Brennan, has claimed that the three engaged in the unlawful and clandestine misuse and distribution of highly confidential material acquired during their employment.
It was also claimed that the defendants had diverted highly valuable business away from the group following their resignations in September.
The three were among the most senior executives in the group and privy to “an enormous quantity of documentation and information of the utmost commercial sensitivity”, it has also claimed.
