Website Design

Cosmetic surgery provider gets High Court injunction against Waterford-based website design company

Cosmetic surgery provider gets High Court injunction against Waterford-based website design company

Dublin-registered RAS Medical Ltd secured the interim order against Waterford company Create for the Web Ltd trading as Ireland Website Design, which had maintained and supported the plaintiff’s website for the last four years.

Represented by Neil Rafter Bl, RAS Medical claims following a falling out between the parties, over an allegedly secret recording of a Zoom call, the defendant has failed to undertake to retain important data relating to the cosmetic surgery’s business.

The permanent loss of the data, which the court heard includes medical data, could have “untold implications” for the business and for the health of RAS Medical’s patients.

The matter came before Mr Justice David Nolan on Thursday, who an on ex-parte (one side only represented) basis granted the applicant orders requiring the defendant to preserve data held by it in respect of RAS Medical’s website.

The judge said that he was satisfied from the evidence put before the court at this stage of the proceedings to grant a temporary order.

The matter will return before the court next week.

RAS Medical, which employs several surgeons to carry out various medical procedures, claims that it entered into an arrangement with the defendant – with a registered address in Tramore Co Waterford – in 2019 for the provision, maintenance and support of several websites including, and

However RAS claims that its relationship with the defendant irretrievably broke down when it learned that private conversation between one of its directors, Dr Ahmed Salman, and a representative of the website company had been recorded by the defendant.

It is also claimed that the recording of the Zoom call was done without Dr Salman’s knowledge and had been published to a former employee of RAS.

The parties had agreed to end their business relationship last month.

However RAS claims that it asked the defendant to preserve all data relevant to the cosmetic surgery’s business, including emails, records, Zoom calls and all information relating to the websites for the last six years.

It claims that the defendant said in correspondence in late October that it would continue to provide services in respect of the transfer of the websites to a new provider.

The parties agreed that the services would continue to the end of the month

RAS claims that despite further correspondence between the parties no undertakings were given by the defendant in relation to the plaintiff’s request to preserve the data in question.

As a result RAS says it was left with no option other than to come to court and seek various orders against the defendant company.

As well as injunctions RAS also seeks various orders compelling the defendant to comply with its obligations under the Data protection Act and damages for allegedly processing and disseminating the plaintiffs personal data without consent or lawful authority and in a malicious manner.

Source link

Leave your thought here

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Enable Notifications OK No thanks