LaflammeAyer596
Employment - Disclosure of Data - Breach of Confidence
The defendant resigned and found employment with one of the claimant's competitors. Shortly after her resignation, the claimant discovered that the defendant had despatched three e-mails to her private e-mail account prior to leaving the company. The e-mails involved:
- Shows she had made to the claimant's prospects;
- Feedback which clients had given in relation to the claimant's companies; and
- Costs of the claimant's products.
The claimant was of the opinion that the knowledge contained in the e-mails was confidential and subsequently violated the phrases of the defendant's contract of employment. The claimant confronted the defendant with its discovery.
The defendant mentioned that she had despatched the e-mails to her personal e-mail account in error, and offered to let the claimant view her personal e-mail account to show that she had not breached the terms of her contract. The claimant tried to persuade the defendant to stay in its employment, but was unsuccessful.
The claimant then instructed its solicitors to write down to the defendant alleging that the defendant had breached the phrases of her employment which amounted to breach of confidence. The claimant also requested the return of all its supplies which have been in the defendant's possession. The defendant replied to the letter stating that the e-mails weren't sent to anyone else, and that when the error had been discovered, she had not even opened them.
The claimant didn't respond to her letter. They instead issued proceedings against her and applied for an interim injunction. They alleged that the sending of the e-mails to her private account amounted to her 'utilizing' confidential info in contravention to her contractual obligations. Additionally they alleged that by her failing to instantly return their supplies, she had additional breached the terms of her contract.
The declare was dismissed. The court docket held the where the e-mails had remained unopened the confidential info had not been 'used' in a manner which amounted to breach of confidence. Although she had not immediately returned the materials, she had previously offered the claimant the permission to view her private e-mail account and to delete the e-mails referring to the claimant's confidential information.
Along with this, the courtroom held that the information which was the subject of the claimant's complaint was utterly innocuous and that the claimant had reacted totally disproportionately. The matter mustn't have been taken to courtroom and the defendant's undertakings had been adequate.
Briefing Notice does not provide a comprehensive or complete statement of the regulation regarding the problems discussed nor does it represent legal advice. It is intended only to focus on normal issues. Specialist legal recommendation should always be sought in relation to specific circumstances.
