13 August 2015

Software: McLean v. Marshall

The Court of Appeal ordered a damages hearing to determine costs incurred to reverse-engineer source code after a joint venture partner departed refusing to provide the code for proprietary software designed to link into a US-based commodity trading system.
The business venture started life as the Pork Bellies Fun Club.  Founding members, a Mr Wayne McLean and a Mr Rob Marshall, joined forces to design an automated system for commodity trading linked to an internet trading facility: Commodity Market Systems.  Their March 2007 agreement set out rules for operation of their joint venture and for its termination.
The court was told Mr Marshall gave notice to end the joint venture in March 2012.  Their parting was not amicable.  The High Court was to later award Mr McLean damages of $4997 (as Mr Marshall’s share of trading losses in testing the software) and a further $17,900 (for identifying and deleting a malicious bug Mr Marshall was alleged to have inserted in the joint venture software).  Left unresolved was a claim of $103,000 damages for Mr Marshall’s failure to provide the source code when their business relationship ended, as required by their joint venture agreement.  The software contained some 45,000 lines of code.  Only Mr Marshall knew how it was constructed.
While the High Court ruled Mr Marshall did breach the joint venture agreement by not providing the source code, there was some confusion as to what losses could be recovered for this breach of contract.  Mr Marshall did belatedly provide the source code, some nine months after the joint venture was terminated.  But by this time the source code had been further developed to suit Mr Marshall’s requirements.
The Court of Appeal said the joint venture contract required Mr Marshall to provide the source code as at the date of termination.  The code handed over did not comply.  The court ruled Mr McLean was entitled to damages covering the cost of reverse-engineering the code delivered to get it back to the state it was in at the date the joint venture terminated.  Further evidence was required to establish these costs.  
McLean v. Marshall – Court of Appeal (13.08.15)

15.087