Deel, a global payroll and compliance platform, scored a recent legal victory. In late September, a Florida judge dismissed that same lawsuit attorney Melanie Damian had filed against the company. Deel had helped Russia-based entities evade U.S. sanctions by allowing them to make payments processed for Surge Capital Ventures, the lawsuit claimed.
At first, Deel’s legal counsel refuted wrongdoing, only to admit to the use of “discreet surveillance” in the suit. The lawsuit’s dismissal comes as a huge victory for Deel. The company alleges that its competitor, Rippling, played a significant role in orchestrating the lawsuit.
In a statement, a Deel spokesperson remarked, “The ruling invites further questions about the credibility of another baseless set of RICO accusations by Rippling in California.” This comment takes aim at one such legal battle that is continuing to develop in California. Rippling has charged Deel with violating the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations (RICO) Act, Defend Trade Secrets Act, and several California state statutes.
Deel’s founder and CEO Alex Bouaziz is currently working to defend himself against multiple lawsuits. He is supported in this endeavor by his father, Philippe Bouaziz who acts as the chairman and CFO. Rippling’s lawsuit has hit Deel with such charging finding terms as operating a “criminal syndicate.” It further claims that Deel has committed corporate espionage against a variety of competitors, not only Rippling.
Testimony from Keith O’Brien, a current Rippling employee, throws a different dimension into the equation in this culture war. For instance, O’Brien recently testified in an Irish court that he had served as a paid corporate spy for Deel. He told the commission that he’s had to get a restraining order issued for his safety. He feels people have been stalking him, putting all of their lives at risk.
Notwithstanding these accusations, Rippling claims that the Florida litigation has nothing to do with their current litigations. Rippling CEO Parker Conrad stated, “This litigation has nothing to do with Rippling, we are not a party to it, did not fund it.”
With the Florida lawsuit dismissal, Deel is unencumbered to focus on its overall business strategy. Now, the company will finally be able to defend against the existential legal challenges that Rippling brings. A Deel spokesperson reiterated their commitment to defending against all claims: “Deel will explore all its options for relief, defend itself vigorously against pending cases and continue to focus on winning in the marketplace.”
As the legal skirmishes unfold, both companies are poised to intensify their efforts in the competitive landscape of payroll and compliance services.
