Qantas Airways Neutrality
ADVICE TO BOARD OF DERECTORS OF VERONICA AIRLINES
I INTRODUCTION As in Qantas Airways Ltd v Lucinda Holdforth, the case brings the issue of confidentiality in the context of employers and employees.[ Qantas Airways Ltd v Lucinda Holdforth [2015] NSWSC 821] In the second section, some relevant legislation protection of confidential information will be listed. In the third section this paper will evaluate the current protection regime, in order to see whether the current law is well developed and find out the grey zone where the employees may take advantage of the confidential information. In the last section, this paper will provide some general recommendations on the ways to protect …show more content…
Under the Restraint of Trade Act 1976, a restraint clause is valid if it is reasonable and not too broad to be enforced.[ Restraint of Trade Act 1976(NSW) SECT 4]
B Equitable obligations In the absence of express terms, employees are still bound by the implied duty of good faith, loyalty and fidelity to their employers, which arises from the special position of trust and confidence held by an employee.[ J Macken, P O’Grady, C Sappideen and G Warburton, Law of Employment (4th ed, 2002), 139–141.] A contract implies an equitable obligation that an employee will
not compete against his employer, including using his employer’s time or own spare time to engage in competitive activities,[ Thomas Marshall Ltd v Guinle [1978] 3 WLR 116 at 132]
maintain trade secrets obtained during employment and not disclose that information adversely to his employer’s interest after the termination of employment.[ Faccenda Chicken Ltd v Fowler [1986] 1 All ER 617, …show more content…
Springboard doctrine See above for explanation of the doctrine. The ‘head-start’ principle[ Mars UK Ltd v Teknowledge Ltd (1999) 46 IPR 248,256.], states that when trade secrets become public and are no longer legally protected, the defendant can be restrained from using that information for a limited reasonable period. The underlying reason for this is that although the information may be publicly available, but any process related to the innovative use of publicly available information may remain confidential.[ Ammon v Consolidated Minerals Ltd [No 3] [2007] WASC 232 per Martin CJ at [290].] This allows for reasonable protection of company information following termination of employment.
B Weaknesses Despite the strengths examined above, the law protecting trade secrets is generally weak in Australia.
1. Relevant statutes The lack of legislation protection is examined below through comparison with equivalent protections in other legal systems.
New
I INTRODUCTION As in Qantas Airways Ltd v Lucinda Holdforth, the case brings the issue of confidentiality in the context of employers and employees.[ Qantas Airways Ltd v Lucinda Holdforth [2015] NSWSC 821] In the second section, some relevant legislation protection of confidential information will be listed. In the third section this paper will evaluate the current protection regime, in order to see whether the current law is well developed and find out the grey zone where the employees may take advantage of the confidential information. In the last section, this paper will provide some general recommendations on the ways to protect …show more content…
Under the Restraint of Trade Act 1976, a restraint clause is valid if it is reasonable and not too broad to be enforced.[ Restraint of Trade Act 1976(NSW) SECT 4]
B Equitable obligations In the absence of express terms, employees are still bound by the implied duty of good faith, loyalty and fidelity to their employers, which arises from the special position of trust and confidence held by an employee.[ J Macken, P O’Grady, C Sappideen and G Warburton, Law of Employment (4th ed, 2002), 139–141.] A contract implies an equitable obligation that an employee will
not compete against his employer, including using his employer’s time or own spare time to engage in competitive activities,[ Thomas Marshall Ltd v Guinle [1978] 3 WLR 116 at 132]
maintain trade secrets obtained during employment and not disclose that information adversely to his employer’s interest after the termination of employment.[ Faccenda Chicken Ltd v Fowler [1986] 1 All ER 617, …show more content…
Springboard doctrine See above for explanation of the doctrine. The ‘head-start’ principle[ Mars UK Ltd v Teknowledge Ltd (1999) 46 IPR 248,256.], states that when trade secrets become public and are no longer legally protected, the defendant can be restrained from using that information for a limited reasonable period. The underlying reason for this is that although the information may be publicly available, but any process related to the innovative use of publicly available information may remain confidential.[ Ammon v Consolidated Minerals Ltd [No 3] [2007] WASC 232 per Martin CJ at [290].] This allows for reasonable protection of company information following termination of employment.
B Weaknesses Despite the strengths examined above, the law protecting trade secrets is generally weak in Australia.
1. Relevant statutes The lack of legislation protection is examined below through comparison with equivalent protections in other legal systems.
New