Vymáhání práv z porušení obchodního tajemství by mělo doznat změn

A government amendment is currently in the consultation process, aimed at modifying the legal framework for protection against trade secret violations in line with the European Parliament and Council Directive (EU) 2016/943 of June 8, 2016, on the protection of undisclosed know-how and business information (trade secrets) against their unlawful acquisition, use, and disclosure.

In addition to significant substantive changes concerning, for example, the most important definitions (which we informed you about HERE), the amendment also addresses the procedural aspects of defending against trade secret violations. It newly regulates the rights that a business can assert in court to protect its trade secrets, as well as other specific aspects of this process.

According to the Civil Code, the injured party primarily has the right to seek the removal of the unlawful state and, if applicable, the right to reasonable compensation, damages, and the return of unjust enrichment. Additional rights are governed by the law on the enforcement of industrial property rights and the protection of trade secrets, which is undergoing significant amendment.

Until now, the protection against trade secret violations was regulated only with reference to the protection of industrial property. The new law will include a list of specific claims that will be available to the injured party. For example, the injured party could demand that the infringer cease using the trade secret or that such use be prohibited. The infringer could also be imposed obligations concerning products that violate the trade secret. They could be prohibited from marketing, importing, or exporting these products, and they could even be compelled to withdraw them from the market or destroy them.

The amendment further addresses the protection of trade secrets within court proceedings. The presiding judge will be able to exclude trade secrets from the case file accessible for inspection or from the judgment intended for publication. It is also explicitly stated that all persons involved in the proceedings are prohibited from disclosing trade secrets that they learned about in connection with the proceedings.

The government proposal also provides certain procedural tools for alleged infringers. For example, it allows them to avoid the imposition of a preliminary measure prohibiting them from continuing to use the allegedly unlawfully acquired trade secret during the court dispute by depositing a security. The infringer could also, in certain cases, propose that instead of obligations related to limiting the availability of products utilizing the trade secret, they be imposed with damages. They could then be completely relieved of these and other obligations by successfully suing for a determination that the fact constituting the trade secret is no longer a trade secret at the time the obligation was imposed due to reasons that cannot be directly or indirectly attributed to the infringer.

Authors:

Jan Turek

Tomáš Černý