A cross-claim by a person subject to a restraint seeking a declaration that the restraint is altogether invalid constitutes an 'application' enlivening the court's power under s 4(3) of the Restraints of Trade Act 1976 (NSW) to read down the restraint, even though the applicant did not expressly seek reading down. The springboard advantage doctrine can be applied analogously to justify a post-termination restraint measured by the time the promisee would need to tool up a replacement manufacturer, not only by the time the promisor would need to develop the information independently. Product specifications and tolerances provided under a manufacturing agreement retain their quality of confidence notwithstanding that the product could be reverse engineered, because reverse engineering requires time and effort that the possessor of the information is spared.
The full text is available to signed-in members, including the 31 later cases that cite this judgment.
1 of the 31 citing cases carry a classified treatment. How each court treated it is available to signed-in members.