Faccenda Chicken Ltd v Fowler
A former employee may use the skill and knowledge acquired in his employment, but must not use or disclose trade secrets, and only trade secrets are protected after employment ends without a restrictive covenant.
Facts
Mr Fowler was the sales manager of Faccenda Chicken, which sold fresh chickens from refrigerated vans to shops and restaurants. He left and set up his own business, selling chickens in the same area, and was joined by several of Faccenda's employees. He used his knowledge of Faccenda's customers, their requirements and the prices they paid. He had no restrictive covenant. Faccenda sued for breach of confidence.
Legal principle
The Court of Appeal held that Mr Fowler was not liable. Neill LJ said that information acquired by an employee falls into three classes: information which is trivial or easily accessible from public sources; information which the employee must treat as confidential while employed, but which becomes part of his own skill and knowledge, which he can use after leaving; and specific trade secrets so confidential that they cannot be used for anyone's benefit but the employer's, even after the employment ends. The information about customers and prices was in the second class, so Mr Fowler could use it after he left, in the absence of a restrictive covenant.
Related cases on breach of confidence and trade secrets
- Attorney General v Guardian Newspapers Ltd (No 2) [1990] 1 AC 109
- Campbell v MGN Ltd [2004] UKHL 22, [2004] 2 AC 457
- Coco v AN Clark (Engineers) Ltd [1969] RPC 41
- Douglas v Hello! Ltd (No 3) [2007] UKHL 21, [2008] 1 AC 1
- Force India Formula One Team Ltd v 1 Malaysia Racing Team Sdn Bhd [2013] EWCA Civ 780, [2013] RPC 36
- Fraser v Thames Television Ltd [1984] QB 44
- HRH Prince of Wales v Associated Newspapers Ltd [2006] EWCA Civ 1776, [2008] Ch 57
- Imerman v Tchenguiz [2010] EWCA Civ 908, [2011] Fam 116
Studying intellectual property law? Our tutors help you understand and apply cases like this in essays, problem questions and exams. Request a quote or browse our law notes.
This summary is for study and revision and is not legal advice. Although our case summaries are checked for accuracy, we do not guarantee that they are free from errors or omissions. Always read the full judgment for the court's reasoning.
