Stratech Systems v Guthrie Properties: Breach of Confidence & Passing Off in Car Park System
Stratech Systems Limited sued Guthrie Properties (S) Pte Ltd and Mall Management Pte Ltd in the High Court of Singapore, alleging breach of confidence and passing off related to Stratech's Intelligent Car Park System (ICPS). Stratech claimed the defendants misused confidential information provided to them and misrepresented the ICPS as their own. The court, presided over by Justice Lai Kew Chai, dismissed Stratech's action, finding no evidence of misuse of confidential information or misrepresentation by the defendants.
1. Case Overview
1.1 Court
High Court1.2 Outcome
Action dismissed with costs.
1.3 Case Type
Civil
1.4 Judgment Type
Judgment
1.5 Jurisdiction
Singapore
1.6 Description
Stratech Systems sued Guthrie Properties for breach of confidence and passing off related to a car park system. The court dismissed the claims, finding no misuse of confidential information or misrepresentation.
1.7 Decision Date
2. Parties and Outcomes
| Party Name | Role | Type | Outcome | Outcome Type | Counsels |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Stratech Systems Limited | Plaintiff | Corporation | Claim Dismissed | Lost | N Screenivasan |
| Guthrie Properties (S) Pte Ltd | Defendant | Corporation | Judgment for Defendant | Won | Dedar Singh Gill, Gerald Koh |
| Mall Management Pte Ltd (formerly known as Guthrie M & E Consultancy Pte Ltd) | Defendant | Corporation | Judgment for Defendant | Won | Dedar Singh Gill, Gerald Koh |
3. Judges
| Judge Name | Title | Delivered Judgment |
|---|---|---|
| Lai Kew Chai | Judge | Yes |
4. Counsels
| Counsel Name | Organization |
|---|---|
| N Screenivasan | Derrick Ravi Partnership |
| Dedar Singh Gill | Drew & Napier |
| Gerald Koh | Drew & Napier |
4. Facts
- Stratech created the Intelligent Car Park System (ICPS) in anticipation of a public tender.
- The ICPS is a cashless and ticketless car park system using OCR technology and NETS cash cards.
- Stratech submitted proposals to JPR and GPS for installing the ICPS at Jurong Point and Guthrie House, respectively.
- JPR issued a purchase order to Stratech for the Jurong Point system, which was completed in August 1999.
- GPS decided not to install Stratech's ICPS at Guthrie House and sought alternatives.
- Ledbury installed a car park system at Guthrie House, subcontracting Optasia and Wei Long.
- Stratech claimed GPS and MM copied the ICPS and were passing it off as their own.
5. Formal Citations
- Stratech Systems Limited v Guthrie Properties (S) Pte Ltd and Another, Suit 575/2000/X, [2001] SGHC 77
6. Timeline
| Date | Event |
|---|---|
| Stratech created and developed the Intelligent Car Park System (ICPS). | |
| Jurong Point Realty Pte Ltd (JPR) sought an innovative car park system for Jurong Point building. | |
| Temasek Polytechnic students submitted entries for the car park system design competition. | |
| Results of the Temasek Polytechnic car park system design competition were announced. | |
| Leong contacted Mickey Teo of GES regarding a cashless car park system at Jurong Point. | |
| Stratech introduced their Smart Park Intelligent Car Park System to JPR. | |
| Stratech submitted a proposal to JPR for implementing the ICPS at Jurong Point. | |
| Stratech forwarded a project plan and revised proposal to JPR. | |
| Trial for the system to be installed at Jurong Point was conducted at Guthrie House. | |
| Leong asked Stratech if they could install a similar car park system at Guthrie House. | |
| Stratech submitted a proposal for the ICPS system to be installed in Guthrie House. | |
| JPR issued a purchase order to Stratech for the Jurong Point system. | |
| Wei Long commenced work for the Vehicle Entry Permit (VEP) project. | |
| The Jurong Point system was completed and operational. | |
| Wei Long loaned cash card components from NETS to make a working prototype of a cash card reader. | |
| Stratech sent a proposal for improvements and additional works to the Jurong Point system. | |
| GPS issued a purchase order to Stratech for the installation of the ICPS at Guthrie House. | |
| Stratech replied that they could not deliver the system by the given timeframe. | |
| Leong contacted Mah of Ledbury to ask if Ledbury could install a cashless car park system for Guthrie House. | |
| Mah demonstrated the prototype to Leong. | |
| GPS informed Stratech of the decision not to proceed with the installation of the ICPS at Guthrie House. | |
| Mah and colleagues visited Jurong Point to observe the JP system. | |
| Ledbury gave a quotation to GPS for the installation of a car park system at Guthrie House. | |
| GPS issued a letter of award to Ledbury for the installation of the car park system at Guthrie House. | |
| Wei Long completed work for the Vehicle Entry Permit (VEP) project. | |
| Ledbury were asked to provide a quotation for another car park system to be built at Craig Place. | |
| The Guthrie House system was installed and operational. | |
| Delivery acceptance certificate for the JP system signed by JPR for Stratech. | |
| Craig Development issued a purchase order to Ledbury to build the same car park system at Craig Place. | |
| Gan and Chong of Commercial Investigations visited Guthrie House, posing as potential customers. | |
| Gan and Chong visited Guthrie House again to speak to Kirk. | |
| Stratech found out that GPS had installed a car park system at Guthrie House and Craig Place. | |
| Stratech discovered that MM were marketing and promoting the car park system installed at Guthrie House. | |
| Stratech engaged private investigators to look into the matter. | |
| Similar car park systems using OCR and NETS installed by Optasia and Wei Long at Ubi Industrial Estate and Orchard Cineleisure. | |
| Stratech filed a patent application for the ICPS in several jurisdictions, including Singapore. | |
| Stratech were informed of GPSs and MMs supposed attempts to pass off the ICPS as their own system. | |
| The action concerns a car park system, described as the Intelligent Car Park System (the ICPS), which the plaintiffs claim to have created and developed. | |
| Decision Date |
7. Legal Issues
- Breach of Confidence
- Outcome: The court found that while the information was confidential and given under an obligation of confidence, there was no misuse of the information by the defendants.
- Category: Substantive
- Sub-Issues:
- Confidentiality of information
- Obligation of confidence
- Unauthorised use of information
- Related Cases:
- [1969] RPC 41
- Passing Off
- Outcome: The court found no misrepresentation by the defendants that they owned or developed the ICPS.
- Category: Substantive
- Sub-Issues:
- Goodwill
- Misrepresentation
- Damage to goodwill
- Related Cases:
- [1994] 3 SLR 308
8. Remedies Sought
- Damages
- Injunctive Relief
9. Cause of Actions
- Breach of Confidence
- Passing Off
10. Practice Areas
- Commercial Litigation
- Intellectual Property Litigation
11. Industries
- Technology
- Property Management
12. Cited Cases
| Case Name | Court | Affirmed | Citation | Jurisdiction | Significance |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Coco v Clark | N/A | Yes | [1969] RPC 41 | N/A | Cited for the requirements to be satisfied before an action for breach of confidence can be made out. |
| Saltman Engineering Co Ltd v Campbell Engineering Co Ltd | N/A | Yes | (1948) 65 RPC 203 | N/A | Cited for the principle that something which is public property and public knowledge cannot provide any foundation for proceedings for breach of confidence. |
| Terrapin Ltd v Builders Supply Company (Hayes) Ltd and Others | N/A | Yes | [1967] RPC 375 | N/A | Cited for the springboard doctrine, where a person who has obtained information in confidence is not allowed to use it as a springboard for activities detrimental to the person who made the confidential communication. |
| Tessensohn t/a Clea Professional Image Consultants v John Robert Powers School Inc & Ors | Court of Appeal | Yes | [1994] 3 SLR 308 | Singapore | Cited for the three essential elements to the tort of passing off: goodwill, misrepresentation, and damage to goodwill. |
| Erven Warnick BV v J Townend & Sons | N/A | Yes | [1979] 2 All ER 927 | N/A | Cited with approval in Tessensohn for the elements of passing off. |
| Reckitt & Colman Products v Borden Inc | N/A | Yes | [1990] 1 All ER 927 | N/A | Cited with approval in Tessensohn for the elements of passing off. |
| Creative Technology Ltd v Aztech Systems Pte Ltd | N/A | Yes | [1997] 1 SLR 621 | N/A | Distinguished from the present case, as the similarities were not as striking or significant as to indicate copying. |
13. Applicable Rules
| Rule Name |
|---|
| No applicable rules |
14. Applicable Statutes
| Statute Name | Jurisdiction |
|---|---|
| No applicable statutes | |
15. Key Terms and Keywords
15.1 Key Terms
- Intelligent Car Park System (ICPS)
- Optical Character Recognition (OCR)
- NETS cash cards
- Cashless
- Ticketless
- System architecture
- Licence Plate Recognition (LPR)
- Grace period
- Springboard doctrine
15.2 Keywords
- car park system
- breach of confidence
- passing off
- OCR technology
- NETS
- Singapore
- Stratech
- Guthrie
16. Subjects
- Intellectual Property
- Commercial Dispute
- Technology Law
17. Areas of Law
- Breach of Confidence
- Passing Off
- Intellectual Property Law
- Commercial Law