Confidential information

Know-how vs confidential information

by

reviewed by

Malcolm Burrows

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:

[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

  • Superannuation changes – are you prepared?

    Superannuation changes – are you prepared?

    The Australian Government has introduced significant changes to superannuation, with gradual increases in the compulsory superannuation rate set to impact both employers and employees. Starting in July 2013, employers will be required to contribute more to their employees’ superannuation funds, with the rate rising to 12% by 2019. This article breaks down the key changes,…

    Read more …

  • Employee Share Scheme (ESS) offering through options

    Employee Share Scheme (ESS) offering through options

    Offering employees shares or options to acquire securities can be a great way to reward, retain, and entice them. Discover the different types of employee share schemes, their associated tax implications, the reporting and withholding obligations employers must satisfy.

    Read more …

  • Federal Court implies a new duty in employment contracts

    Federal Court implies a new duty in employment contracts

    The landmark Commonwealth Bank of Australia v Barker [2014] HCA 32 ruling has changed the way employers must manage their employees. Find out how this Federal Court decision could affect your business and what you need to do to ensure compliance.

    Read more …

  • Employee or contractor – impact on intellectual property

    Employee or contractor – impact on intellectual property

    This article explores the legal implications of determining whether an individual is an employee or contractor. Learn how a multi-factor test can help to identify the correct status, and understand the potential impact on intellectual property.

    Read more …

  • Social media policies are a necessity for large companies – Fair Work Australia

    Social media policies are a necessity for large companies – Fair Work Australia

    The case of Stutsel v Linfox Australia Pty Limited [2011] FWA 8444 highlights the importance of having a clear social media policy. Mr Stutsel’s dismissal for making derogatory comments on Facebook was deemed unfair, as the company lacked a formal policy on social media use. This case serves as a reminder that businesses should implement…

    Read more …

  • What is a Twitter follower worth?

    What is a Twitter follower worth?

    This legal case could have far-reaching implications for the value of social media followers and connections. Find out what this dispute between Phonedog and Noah Kravitz could mean for employers and employees in the future.

    Read more …

  • Can employers be liable for employees’ criminal actions?

    Can employers be liable for employees’ criminal actions?

    This article summarises the tests used to determine if an employer is liable for an employee’s dishonest conduct, with reference to Ffrench V Sestili; Sestili v Triton Underwriting Insurance Agency P/L [2007] SASC 241. Recommendations are provided to help employers reduce potential liability.

    Read more …

  • Commercialising intellectual property assets

    Commercialising intellectual property assets

    Discover the various ways to unlock the commercial value of your Intellectual Property (IP). Learn about intellectual property licensing, intellectual property sale and subsequent licensing, joint ventures, mergers and acquisitions and spin out entities.

    Read more …

  • Licence Agreements to exploit IP

    Licence Agreements to exploit IP

    Discover the benefits of licensing your intellectual property and how to maximise its commercial value. Learn about the rights and permissions you can grant to another party, and the payments or royalties you can receive in exchange.

    Read more …

Send this to a friend