Deel wants the undulation to give all the agreements involving the payment of the presumed spy

DEEL launched a new volley in the current legal battle with the RH Tech RIV startup. Deel filed a request, containing a series of letters, asking the Irish court to make information on the information.

In a letter, Deel wants unwanted versions of witnesses’ affidavits, including the famous by the former undulating employee, Keith O’Brien. In a story full of twists and turns that read like a film, O’Brien admitted in an Irish court to be a spy for Deel, according to the Affidavit published by Rippling.

Ripple has filed a legal action Against Deel in March, this alleys a diversion from trade secrets, criminal interference, unfair competition, and even more, largely based on spying allegations.

Share Since the counterTrying to have bippling on a series of questions like jurisdiction, but also to make its own allegations concerning the undulation, reject. Deel alleys, for example, that the undulation also tried to spy on Deel.

In the letters published publicly on Monday, Deel points to an affidavit of the undulating employee, Vanessa Wu, former lawyer general of the undulation. A large part of the Affidavit told what Wu recalled the so -called events related to the spy and his entrepreneurs on various letters sent between the lawyers of the two parties.

But Deel stresses that Wu also testified that the undulation dismissed O’Brien and paid him out of the termination fees in exchange for the signing of an agreement not to continue. Wu also testified, the Affidavit said that Rippling concluded a second agreement with O’Brien where the undulation “agreed to contribute to the costs of Mr. O’Brien of this procedure and to pay his pocket and legal fees within the framework of the cooperation to be provided under this agreement.”

Deel wants a tribunal to make a completely expelled complete versions of these two agreements. He means anyone who listens to how unusual it is that an employee licensed for a cause dates back to the wage bill of a company as a paid witness.

Needless to say, the two parties vehemently proclaim their own innocence while pointing their fingers on the other.

We will have to wait and see what the court governs, but if it is more testimony from O’Brien and these dismissal agreements accessible to the public, we read.