Copyright : Infringement - Whether there was copyright infringement - 1st defendant claimed to be author and owner of rights pursuant to an alleged license agreement - Whether screenshot from 1st defendant's notebook reliable - Whether alleged license agreement genuine - Owner of copyright of work - Whether copyright had been infringed - Damages entitled to

Tort : Breach of confidence - Disclosure of confidential information - Whether defendants committed tort of breach of confidence

Tort : Unlawful interference - Whether defendants unlawfully interfered with plaintiff 's business

Tort : Conspiracy - Commission of unlawful act - Whether there was conspiracy by unlawful means against plaintiff

Evidence : Adverse inference - Failure to call material witness - Effect of defendants' failure to call material witnesses and adduce material evidence

The plaintiff company ('the plaintiff ') claimed against the defendants based on these causes of action: (a) copyright infringement under s 36(1) of the Copyright Act 1987 ('CA'); (b) tort of breach of confidence; (c) tort of unlawful interference with plaintiff 's business; and (d) tort of conspiracy by unlawful means. The 1st defendant had counterclaimed against the plaintiff for copyright infringement, tort of breach of confidence and tort of unlawful interference with the 1st defendant's business. The claims by the parties revolved around the "Electronic Vehicle Authentication System" 'eVAS System') which the plaintiff claimed constituted as confidential information and a trade secret which was owned exclusively by the plaintiff. On the other hand,