Search
Close this search box.

Protecting confidential information – a welcome clarification from the Court

Businesses are often faced with the difficult position of employees leaving who may be in possession of confidential material and trade secrets. There is a risk that current or former employees (and/or directors) may seek to use that material to their advantage, for example by competing with their former employer.

Businesses are often faced with the difficult position of employees leaving who may be in possession of confidential material and trade secrets. There is a risk that current or former employees (and/or directors) may seek to use that material to their advantage, for example by competing with their former employer.

When faced with that scenario, a business will seek to rely on the employment contract, which will (if well drafted) forbid the use of confidential information and require it to be returned at the end of employment. The common law also provides some protection, allowing for an equitable claim of “breach of confidence” which does not strictly rely on a contractual term.

In Weiss Technik UK Limited v Mr Christopher Davies the High Court has provided some welcome clarification in this area and confirmed that a claimant business (the victim of a breach of confidence) does not need to demonstrate that it has suffered “positive harm” as a result. Previous authorities suggested that a business would need to prove that confidential information had been taken, had been used in competition, and its use had caused loss and damage. That was often a difficult hurdle to overcome and would mean a business was put to significant expense and risk to establish the facts necessary to prove loss.

However, in Weiss Technik, the Court provided some helpful clarification, deciding that:

“If the defendants have deliberately and surreptitiously obtained, copied and stored the claimants’ confidential information for the purposes of a competing business, in circumstances where the defendants knew or should have known the information to be confidential, that is sufficient to establish a breach of confidence as an equitable claim. It is not necessary to show that the defendants have specifically used the material in their business, or that the claimants have suffered loss and damage as a result.”

This decision will be welcomed by businesses seeking to protect confidential information and its misuse by employees. It will help in cases where information has been disclosed to a third-party (say a competitor), but there is no direct evidence of it being used (yet).

Source: Lexology

Read more

Latest News

Read More

Rise in recruitment fraud must urgently be checked

28 March 2024

Newsletter

Receive the latest HR news and strategic content

Please note, as per the GDPR Legislation, we need to ensure you are ‘Opted In’ to receive updates from ‘theHRDIRECTOR’. We will NEVER sell, rent, share or give away your data to third parties. We only use it to send information about our products and updates within the HR space To see our Privacy Policy – click here

Latest HR Jobs

University of Cambridge – Judge Business SchoolSalary: £32,332 to £38,205 pa, pro rata This provides summary information and comment on the subject areas covered. Where

University of Cambridge – Judge Business SchoolSalary: £29,605 to £33,966 pa, pro rata This provides summary information and comment on the subject areas covered. Where

University of Oxford – Blavatnik School of GovernmentSalary: Grade 5: £28,759 – £33,966 per annum (with a discretionary range to £37,099) This provides summary information

Software Development Director (Exec Team Seat). Remote Working with Ellesmere Port Office-Based Minimum 1 Day Per Week. + Contribution towards membership fees. £120,000 – £140,000

Read the latest digital issue of theHRDIRECTOR for FREE

Read the latest digital issue of theHRDIRECTOR for FREE