Ad giant WPP is fighting back against a lawsuit filed by one of its former executives, alleging that he improperly leaked sensitive trade secrets and client data that could jeopardize its business.
The lawsuit, from former WPP exec Richard Foster, accuses the company of retaliating against him and firing him after he raised concerns that the group’s media investment division was allegedly running an improper global kickback operation. In a new filing added to the case last week, Foster’s legal team included details of a purported investigation by WPP client Sony that said WPP had run a “fraud scheme” in China and other markets, in which it improperly withheld rebates from its clients.
WPP’s lawyers on Thursday filed a motion to seal from public view several paragraphs, figures, and exhibits from within Foster’s amended complaint. In a memo to support its proposed order to seal, WPP argues Foster’s complaint is stacked with “immaterial and salacious allegations” designed to harass the ad agency group and its clients.
WPP declined to comment on the latest filings. Sony declined to comment.
William A. Brewer III, partner at Brewer, Attorneys & Counselors and lead counsel to Foster, said in a statement that it was reviewing WPP’s motion.
“Mr. Foster will oppose any attempt to seal the facts of this case from those with an interest in this matter,” Brewer said.
WPP argues in its filing that Sony is an uninvolved party to the case and that its privacy should be protected. WPP says that the inclusion of Sony’s purported investigation into WPP is irrelevant to Foster’s argument because the alleged events took place in China, where Foster didn’t work, and happened after he was terminated from the company.
WPP also argues that Foster’s complaint reveals “highly confidential, proprietary and competitively sensitive business information” about its own business, including financial and performance records, client lists, alleged threats to its business, and forward-looking business strategies. WPP submitted to the court the confidentiality agreement Foster signed in 2018, which included language prohibiting him from disclosing confidential information or trade secrets about the company or its clients, either during his employment or after his termination.
WPP alleges in the filing that Foster also violated attorney-client privilege protections by including details in his lawsuit about private conversations he had with WPP’s in-house lawyer.
It contends that in disclosing the sensitive materials, Foster sought to embarrass his former employer and jeopardize its “competitive position in the entertainment and advertising industry.”
“The addition of salacious, muckraking allegations and disclosure of highly sensitive and/or privileged information in the Amended Complaint cannot change the brutal truth: Plaintiff is not and never has been a whistleblower, and this entire lawsuit is nothing more than a disgruntled employee’s naked attempt to leverage an exorbitant payout,” WPP says in its filing.
Foster had previously turned down a “seven-figure termination package which included an obligation of silence regarding the company’s undisclosed rebate practices,” according to his amended complaint, filed last week.
WPP says in its new filing that its objections to the disclosure of privileged and confidential information shouldn’t be construed as an admission to the accuracy of the allegations within Foster’s complaint. WPP says it intends to file an updated motion to dismiss the case, which it says in the filing will further address “the deficiencies” in Foster’s complaint.
