confidential information

What is a trade secret – Australian law?

HomePrivate: BlogIP litigation and disputesBreach of confidenceWhat is a trade secret – Australian law?

by

reviewed by

Malcolm Burrows

In simple terms, a trade secret is any secret commercial information that provides one business with an advantage over another.  For example, trade secrets have been used by Coco-Cola for decades to ensure that its formula remains secret.

Despite the lack of a settled, legal definition of a “trade secret”, their value is recognised at both law, and in equity.  At law, restraints of trade can be legitimately used in order to prevent the disclosure of trade secrets, or to prevent the use of trade secrets by employees in any subsequent business or employment.  Trade secrets are protected in equity by way of an action for breach of confidence even in the absence of contractual agreements restraining their use.

What are the characteristics of a trade secret?

Searle Australia Pty Ltd v Public Interest Advocacy Centre [1992] FCA 241 held that a “trade secret” is “a device, or technique used in a particular trade or occupation and giving an advantage not generally known”.  This may include “formulae for products as well as information concerning customers provided, in each case that the information is in fact secret and would be to the advantage of trade rivals to obtain”.  The Federal Court stated that a trade secret has three (3) characteristics:

  • it must be information used in a trade or business;
  • the owner must limit the dissemination of it or at least not encourage or permit widespread publication; and
  • it is information, which if disclosed to a competitor, would be liable to cause real (or significant) harm to the owner of the secret.

When determining whether a trade secret has the necessary ‘quality of confidence’, there is no requirement that information be ‘novel’ or ‘inventive’, nor that the information be totally new or secret.  It is usually sufficient that the information has not moved into the public domain.  Relevant factors identified by Justice Gowans in Ansell Rubber Co Pty Ltd v Allied Rubber Industries Pty Ltd [1967] VR 37 at 50 included:

  • the extent to which the information is known outside of [the] business;
  • the extent to which it is known by employees and others involved in [the] business;
  • the extent of measures taken … to guard the secrecy of the information;
  • the value of the information to [the business] and to [its] competitors;
  • the amount of effort or money expended… in developing the information; and
  • the ease or difficulty with which the information could be properly acquired or duplicated by others.

Recognised trade secrets

Information that is not a trade secret

  • Faccenda Chicken Ltd v Fowler [1987] 1 Ch 117general skill and knowledge that a person of ability necessarily acquires in his or her business or calling.
  • Seager v Copydex Ltd [1967] 2 All ER 415 – information that is classified as iniquitous or infamous (due to the public interest in the disclosure of such information).
  • Secton Pty Ltd v Delawood Pty Ltd (1991) 21 IPR 136 – simple goals, purposes or possibilities, as distinguished from some novel means of achieving such goals, purposes or possibilities.

Takeaways

The most important point to take from these cases is that a trade secret will only arise when a business takes active precautions to ensure the information in question remains confidential.  If your business relies on sensitive information that you would consider to be a trade secret, we encourage you to consult with a legal practitioner for advice on maximising its protection.

Links and further references

Cases

Ansell Rubber Co Pty Ltd v Allied Rubber Industries Pty Ltd [1967] VR 37

Consolidated Paper Industries Pty Ltd v Matthews [2004] WASC 161

Digital Products Group v Opferkuch [2008] NSWSC 575

Faccenda Chicken Ltd v Fowler [1987] 1 Ch 117

N P Generations Pty Ltd v Feneley No. SCCIV-00-242 [2001] SASC 185

Seager v Copydex Ltd [1967] 2 All ER 415

Searle Australia Pty Ltd v Public Interest Advocacy Centre [1992] FCA 241

Secton Pty Ltd v Delawood Pty Ltd (1991) 21 IPR 136

Further information about trade secrets

If you need advice on trade secrets or otherwise protecting the intellectual property of your business, please contact me for a confidential and obligation free discussion:


Related insights about trade secrets and confidential information

  • Misuse of confidential information within source code

    Misuse of confidential information within source code

    In Australia, computer code can amount to confidential information as well as being subject to copyright protection.  In some cases the two things overlap as was the case in decision of the Court in Optus Networks Pty Ltd v Telstra Corporation Ltd (2010) 265 ALR 281; [2010] FCAFC 21.

    Read more …

  • Ex-employees and intellectual property protection

    Ex-employees and intellectual property protection

    Ex-employees can be a threat to a company’s intellectual property, but with the right contractual clauses, employers can protect their trademarks, copyright, patent, and design. Learn more about how to safeguard your company’s intellectual property.

    Read more …

  • Use of confidential information – the springboard injunction

    Use of confidential information – the springboard injunction

    This article examines the UK decision of Forse & ors v Secarma Ltd & ors [2019] EWCA Civ 215, which discussed the legal concept of a springboard injunction, and its implications in Australia. The Court must consider similar principles to determine if an injunction should be granted.

    Read more …

  • Injunction sought for breach of confidence

    Injunction sought for breach of confidence

    Dundas Lawyers helped a corporate client protect their confidential information and copyright material from a former employee and contractor. Read the full article to learn how they used detailed work and a chronology to secure justice for their client.

    Read more …

  • Are fiduciary duties owed by former company directors?

    Are fiduciary duties owed by former company directors?

    A former director’s duties and responsibilities to their previous company may not end with their resignation. Find out how the Advanced Fuels Technology Pty Ltd v Blythe & Ors [2018] VSC 286 case explored this concept and what the Court had to say.

    Read more …

  • What exactly is the springboard doctrine?

    What exactly is the springboard doctrine?

    This article examines the ‘springboard’ doctrine which refers to the benefit that is derived because of misuse of confidential information by a defendant that enables them to ‘springboard’ a new product or service to market more rapidly than if they had used their own mind.

    Read more …

  • Know-how vs confidential information

    Know-how vs confidential information

    Understand the difference between “know-how” and confidential information when it comes to employer-employee relationships. Find out how to protect confidential trade secrets and use broad contractual terms to ensure protection. Click through to get the full details.

    Read more …

  • Compilations from the public domain – confidential or not?

    Compilations from the public domain – confidential or not?

    The Court of Appeal in Ezystay Systems Pty Ltd v Link 2 Pty Ltd [2014] NSWSC 180 had to re-examine the test for confidential information. It found that for information to be protected, it must have the necessary attributes of confidentiality and must be the product of skill and ingenuity of the human brain.

    Read more …

  • Tort of conspiracy & confidential info

    Tort of conspiracy & confidential info

    Australian Intelligence Community (AIC) and PC Falk issued decision in Uber Technologies and Uber B.V. investigation, providing guidance on Privacy Act 1988 (Cth) compliance and penalties. Uber ordered to implement plans, policies and programs and engage independent expert to ensure compliance.

    Read more …


Posted

in

,
Send this to a friend