By Simon Abraham

16 November 2018

In a ground breaking decision delivered on 10 October 2018, the High Court set out exactly what happens when employees and competitors set out to steal clients through reliance upon confidential information or improper insider knowledge. Short answer… the fraudulent use of confidential insider information for a competitive edge will see the Court come down hard!

The case of Ancient Foresters in Victoria Friendly Society Limited v Lifeplan Australia Friendly Society Limited [2018] HCA 43 involved two senior employees of Lifeplan, a funeral business, who secretly approached a much smaller competitor, Foresters, with a five year business plan to use insider information to ‘steal’ Lifeplan’s clientele. The Board of Foresters agreed to the proposal and the business skyrocketed in size from $1.6m revenue to $24m revenue in two years.

Meanwhile, Lifeplan lost $23m in revenue in the same period. The Court held the employees personally liable (as expected), however in a remarkable turn of events, the Court further extrapolated the liability to additionally encompass Foresters’ business in its entirety. This additional liability was on the basis that Foresters knowingly assisted the employees’ fraud through engaging in the dishonest business plan.

This serves a clear warning to those who engage with or participate in breaches of fiduciary, director or employee duties. We live in a competitive world – but a competitor assisting in ‘dishonest and fraudulent’ conduct can be classified as ‘knowingly assisting’ the furtherance of such fraud.

Employees wishing to engage in commercial competition with their employer must not take any steps towards that endeavour until all association with the employer has ceased. The High Court took this reasoning one step further and held that where a competitive business knowingly assists in such dishonest behaviour, they too will be held liable and stand to potentially lose the entire net present value of their business. The profits received from the competitor in encouraging the fraudulent acts are one thing; however, the Court emphasised that the business connections made throughout such an endeavour convey far-reaching future benefits on the company. These future commercial benefits must be accounted for too as they would not have been realised but for the direct relationship with the dishonest employees.

The Court emphasised the need to deter all future persons from facilitating or engaging in such dishonest behaviour as a matter of principle and legal policy. The message is clear – if a business is built on foundations of fraud or breach of contract, then the competitor benefiting from the fruit of this poison tree can suffer severe financial consequences.


If you require advice surrounding Employment Law, please do not hesitate to contact Simon Abraham or a member of our Litigation & Dispute Resolution team.


The material contained in this publication is meant to be informational only and is not to be construed as legal advice. Tisher Liner FC Law will not be held liable or responsible for any claim, which is made as a result of any person relying upon the information contained in this publication.

Related Articles

View All
Employment Law

When can I direct an employee to get the COVID-19 jab and what can I do if they refuse?

FWO further guidance The FWO has now provided further guidance in relation to when it is lawful and reasonable for an...
Read More
Employment Law

Can an employer force an employee to get the COVID-19 jab?

This question is topical given recent discussions around the roll out of the Pfizer COVID-19 vaccine in Australia and...
Read More
Employment Law / Small to Medium Enterprises

Full Federal Court allows double dipping for casual employees

Justice Bromberg and the Full Federal Court of Australia have once again delivered bad news for employers  In certain...
Read More
Employment Law / Small to Medium Enterprises / Start-ups & Emerging Enterprises

Fair Work Commission amends 99 Awards during COVID-19 Pandemic

On Wednesday, 8 April 2020, as a result of the COVID-19 Pandemic, a six (6) member Fair Work Commission full bench,...
Read More
Employment Law

New industrial manslaughter laws are no laughing matter for employers

What are the laws The new laws will be applicable to all employers, self-employed individuals and officers of a company...
Read More
Employment Law / Commercial Law / Litigation & Dispute Resolution

What employers need to know when letting someone go

A staff member may need to be let go because the business can no longer afford them, or perhaps they are just not...
Read More
Employment Law / Litigation & Dispute Resolution / Construction

Does it Really Matter What You Call Your Employees? The Difference Between a Permanent and a Casual Employee.

The Federal Court found the casual employee worked a regular and continuous pattern of work for more than two years,...
Read More
Commercial Law / Construction / Employment Law

September 2018 Newsletter

September 2018 Newsletter See the full newsletter here Welcome TLFC Law are pleased to welcome Min Seetoh to the...
Read More
Commercial Law / Employment Law / Real Estate Agents

Are you complying with the Real Estate Industry Award? Don’t get caught out!

Changes to the Real Estate Industry Award 2010 Important changes to the Award include: Classification of employees and...
Read More
Not-for-Profit & Charities / Technology and Start Ups / Adverse Possession

TLFC – Award Finalist for Law Firm of the Year (Medium Category)

Tisher Liner FC are proud to be nominated as an award finalist in the 14th annual Victorian Legal Awards Medium Law...
Read More
Employment Law

First they came for the accountants…

With several popular restaurants recently making headlines for allegedly underpaying employees, it is a good time for...
Read More