Sane Aztec Ltd. was in business of electroplating the internal surface of cylinders of internal combustion engines with a thin layer of nickel silicon carbide. The company employed Mr Rahul as a sales engineer from March

Trade secrets are just as other intellectual property rights, can be extremely valuable to a company's growth and sometimes even critical for its survival. Businesses must ensure that they adequately protect their business processes, technical know-how and confidential information from competitors. A trade secret may refer to a practice, process, design, instrument or a compilation of data or information relating to the business which is not generally known to the public and which the owner reasonably attempts to keep secret and confidential. Such data or information may also involve an economic interest of the owner in obtaining an economic advantage over competitors. Trade secrets are not protected by law in the same manner as trademarks and patents. There is no statute or legislation that governs the protection of trade secrets in India. However, rights in respect of trade secrets are enforced through contract law (Indian Contract Act, 1872), principles of equity or by way of a common law action for breach of confidence. The test for a cause of action for breach of confidence in the common law is that: The information must itself have the necessary quality of confidence about it; The information must have been imparted in circumstances importing an obligation of confidence; and There must be an unauthorised use of that information to the detriment of the party communicating it. In case to prove violation of trade secret, there is the need for the following criteria: Existence: the trade secret must be proved to exist. Ownership: it must be proved that the plaintiff had ownership rights to the trade secret information. Access: it must be proved that the defendant had access to the trade secret information. Notice: it must be proved that the defendant knew or should have known that the information was a trade secret of the plaintiff. Use: it must be proved that the trade secret information was actually used by the defendant. Damages: it must be proved that a remedy exists within the power of the court to apply. There is no specific legislation in India to protect trade secrets and confidential information. Nevertheless, Indian Courts have upheld trade secret protection on the basis of principles of equity, and at times, upon a common law action of breach of confidence, which in effect amounts to a breach of contractual obligation. In the present case, it was found that: a) Electroplating process and apparatus was not a novel one as the information is available in Literature. b) Contract did not mention clearly about the confidentiality of information about the electroplating process and the apparatus. c) Company could not prove that Rahul knew it to be a trade secret. d) Company could not prove that it was a trade secret. Rahul would thus succeed.