In evidence, a number of witnesses, particularly James O’Donnell, questioned whether KIT ever existed and claimed that, notwithstanding he had worked with NTAS for a number of years, he had no knowledge of what KIT is.
George Sipko claimed he had written KIT as an “empty cybernetical system” and that software had allowed Koger to build the information management system that became NTAS. George Sipko claims that NTAS was developed using software he had designed in 1994 known as KIT or “Koger Inherited Technology”. Thereafter the software product known as NTAS was continuously updated and revised. The product was developed throughout 1996 and into 1997 and the product was launched in 1997. The software product was developed for customers in the fund administration industry. NTAS was an acronym for New Transfer Agency System. The plaintiffs developed a proprietary software product called NTAS. Those two persons developed and designed back office software for fund administrators, fund managers and fund advisers. George Sipko jointly founded, together with Paul Piringer the first named plaintiff. The plaintiffs also claimed ancillary relief in the form of injunctive and declaratory relief as set out in the statement of claim.Ĥ. There was a separate claim against the first named defendant for damages for inducing or procuring breach of contract and against the fourth named defendant for damages for wrongful interference with the economic interests of the plaintiffs or either of them together with a claim of damages for inducing or procuring breach of contract. The plaintiffs also claimed aggravated or exemplary damages and damages against the first, second and third named defendants for breach of contract, breach of fiduciary duty and damages for breach of duties of loyalty and fidelity. There was also a claim for damages for conspiracy, it being alleged that the defendants and each of them had conspired to breach confidence and/or abuse the confidential information of the plaintiffs and each of them. There was a claim for damages or, at the plaintiffs’ option, an account of the profits of the defendants and each of them in respect of copyright infringement and the plaintiffs also claimed relief in respect of an allegation of breach of confidence and/or abuse of confidential information and/or trade secrets by the defendants and each of them. The plaintiffs claimed that the defendants had infringed the plaintiffs’ copyright and that the plaintiffs were entitled to injunctive relief restraining the defendants from infringing the plaintiffs’ copyright in the plaintiffs’ two software products. It was claimed that the defendants and each of them had infringed the copyright of the first named plaintiff in a computer software program known as NTAS and the related program known as E*TAS. In the proceedings the two plaintiffs claimed that the defendants had been in breach of copyright and breach of confidence. The proceedings were brought against three individuals, James O’Donnell (also known as Seamus O’Donnell), Roger Woolman and David Gross named as first, second and third named defendants and the fourth named defendant was a company which had been set up by those three persons, namely, HWM Financial Solutions Limited, hereinafter known as HWM. These proceedings were commenced by the two plaintiff companies by plenary summons dated the 28th May, 2008.