In an article entitled “is your confidential information really confidential” we discussed what is and isn’t confidential information and how this term is nearly always misused. This article discusses a category of confidential information known as “know-how” and what rights employers have over it.
So what precisely is know-how?
Know-how is information that is confidential “but which once learned necessarily remains in the servant’s head and becomes a part of his own skill and knowledge applied in the court of his master’s business”.[1] The Courts have recognised that know-how forms part of an employee’s acquired or inherent state of knowledge. While employers are entitled to protect their confidential information from being used by former employees to their detriment, this interest must be balanced against the:
“prima facie right of any person to use and exploit for the purpose of earning his living all the skill, experience and knowledge which he has at his disposal, including skill, expertise and knowledge which he has acquired in the course of previous periods of employment.”[2]
In other words, know-how is the accumulated knowledge of how to do something, and is usually acquired through work experience. Know-how travels with an employee, and if an organisation wishes to restrain the use of know-how, the issue needs careful and specific legal consideration.
The know-how versus confidential information dichotomy
In an employer-employee context, there is a distinction between ‘know-how’ and confidential information. In determining this distinction, the court considers two (2) competing public policy interests:
- that employees should not be restricted in using skill, experience and know-how acquired in the service of their former employer in legitimate competition; in contrast to
- the need for the law to protect the confidentiality and misuse of trade secrets.[3]
In Wright v Gasweld Pty Ltd, Kirby P approved the following classification for information obtained from being employed:
- information that because of its triviality or public availability cannot be regarded as confidential;
- information the employee must treat as confidential until the termination of their employment, but which once learned, remains in the employee’s head and becomes part of their skill and knowledge (Know How); and
- specific trade secrets which cannot lawfully be used other than for the employer’s benefit (Trade Secrets).[4]
If analysed this way, information can be protected in the second and third categories, although in the second, it can only be protected during the course of employment.
See our article entitled “What is a trade secret” for further discussion.
Can an employer take action if an employee misuses their know-how?
This will of course depend on the point in time when this occurs and whether or not the particular information concerned is capable of being protected as confidential information.
A claim could potentially be available at common law for breach of confidence. However, before the Court can intervene, an employer will need to show they took reasonable steps to identify and subsequently keep the information contained or confidential.
Takeaways
Businesses that are concerned about protecting their confidential information need to clearly identify the different classes of knowledge which can be protected and take positive steps to protect it. Broad contractual terms to the effect that ‘everything is confidential’ are unlikely to be enforceable.
Links and further references
Cases
Ansell Rubber Co Pty Ltd v Allied Rubber Industries Pty Ltd [1967] VicRp 7
Faccenda Chicken Ltd v Fowler [1987] Ch 117
Herbert Morris Ltd v Saxelby [1916] 1 AC 688
Mense and Ampere Electric Manufacturing Co Pty Ltd v Milenkovic [1973] VicRp 78
Wright v Gasweld Pty Ltd (1991) 22 NSWLR 317
Decisions on confidential information
Hill & Smith Holdings PLC v Safe Barriers Pty Ltd (No 2) [2020] FCA 8 (8 January 2020)
Further information about confidential information
If you need advice on protecting the confidential information and defining the boundary with know-how, contact me for an obligation free and confidential discussion:
Malcolm Burrows B.Bus.,MBA.,LL.B.,LL.M.,MQLS.
Legal Practice Director
T: +61 7 3221 0013 (preferred)
M: +61 419 726 535
E: mburrows@dundaslawyers.com.au
Disclaimer
This article contains general commentary only. You should not rely on the commentary as legal advice. Specific legal advice should be obtained to ascertain how the law applies to your particular circumstances.
[1] Wright v Gasweld Pty Ltd (1991) 22 NSWLR 317 at [97].
[2] Faccenda Chicken Ltd v Fowler [1987] Ch 117 at [128].
[3] Herbert Morris Ltd v Saxelby [1916] 1 AC 688 at [714].
[4] Wright v Gasweld Pty Ltd (1991) 22 NSWLR 317 at [339].
Related insights about confidential information
-
Why employers require a drug and alcohol policy
Employers need to draft and implement a drug and alcohol policy to protect workers and the business from the risks associated with drug and alcohol use. This article outlines the importance of such a policy.
-
Dallas Buyers Club wins preliminary discovery order
The Federal Court of Australia has granted a controversial application that could allow copyright holders to identify and pursue alleged infringers of their work. Find out what conditions were imposed on the copyright holders and what this could mean for the future of online copyright infringement.
-
Plant breeder’s rights – an introduction
This article explores the Plant Breeders Rights Act 1994 (Cth) and its implications for plant variety protection. Learn more about the exclusive rights granted to plant breeders, the registration requirements, and the exceptions that apply.
-
Facebook comments ruled as workplace bullying
A ruling by the Fair Work Commission has broadened the concept of ‘being at work’ to include activities authorized or permitted by the employer. Learn more about how this could affect your workplace and why it’s important to have a strong social media policy in place.
-
Selling counterfeit poles breaches IP rights
Australian sellers Vertical Leisure Ltd and Dance4Me Pty Ltd have won AU$394,800 in damages from competitor Skyrunner Pty Ltd, who sold counterfeit “X-Pole” dancing poles. The Federal Circuit Court’s decision provides guidance for calculating damages for multiple IP rights breaches.
-
No implied term of mutual trust and confidence in employment contracts: Implications for employers
The High Court of Australia (High Court) has determined that employment contracts in Australia do not contain an implied term of mutual trust and confidence imposing an obligation on employers to treat their employees fairly or reasonably.
-
Employment changes may trigger a constructive dismissal claim
Employers must be aware of potential constructive dismissal claims: a concept recognised by the Fair Work Act 2009 (Cth) and common law. Employees must prove the employer’s conduct was the principal factor in their resignation.
-
Getting confidentiality agreements in place
Part 5 – Planning a business acquisition Confidentiality Agreements (Confidentiality Agreement or NDA’s) are essential in business Acquisitions, particularly if either the Target or Acquirer is subject to the ASX Listing Rules. Whilst generally an equitable obligation of confidence is applicable, a Confidentiality Agreement reduces the obligations of the parties to writing to ensure that…
-
Preparing staff and others for due diligence
This article explores the scope of initial due diligence, roles and responsibilities of an Advisory Team, considerations for retained employees, and the importance of project management in the acquisition process. Plus, a disclaimer and contact information for a legal practice director.
