This is a preview. To continue reading please log in or Register to read this article

Confidential information: Features of electroplating cell were not protected against misuse by ex-employee

This report relates to 1 case(s)

  • expand disabled

    AT Poeton (Gloucester Plating) Ltd and another v Horton and another [2000] ICR 1208 CA (0 other reports)

In AT Poeton (Gloucester Plating) Ltd and another v Horton [2000] ICR 1208, the Court of Appeal holds that features of an electroplating cell used by an employer, which was substantially the same as the cell used by one of the employer's former employees in his own business after he left its employment, did not come within class 3 of the Faccenda Chicken classification of trade secrets. That is, assuming that the aggregation of those features gave rise to a trade secret, it was not so confidential that it could not lawfully have been used for anyone's benefit but the employer's.