Breach of Confidence: Improper Use of Business Information Including Trade Secrets | Benchmark Legal Offices
Helpful?
Yes No Share to Facebook

Breach of Confidence:

Improper Use of Business Information Including Trade Secrets



Last Updated: June 11 2026

Question: What can I do if a former employee or competitor misused my confidential business information in Ontario?

Answer: If your confidential information (such as a recipe, customer list, software, or process) was shared in confidence and then used without authorization, you may have a claim for breach of confidence and can seek remedies like an injunction to stop further use and compensation for losses; key factors include whether the information was truly confidential, communicated in confidence, and misused, as set out in Lac Minerals Ltd. v. International Corona Resources Ltd., [1989] 2 S.C.R. 574.   Contact Benchmark Legal Offices, a Paralegals and Lawyers’ Office to Serve You, for practical, Ontario-wide next steps like evidence preservation and demand letters, and call (289) 389-8840 to book a consultation.

Misused Business Secrets

In business, the product recipes, proprietary software, systems and processes, among many other things, may be highly valuable and the misuse of such confidential information may result in considerable harm.  Generally, breach of confidence involves the wrongful use of information that was openly shared with the party that subsequently misuses the secretive information; and in this respect, breach of confidence differs from theft of trade secrets which would involve an element of misappropriation.

The Law

Per the Supreme Court in the case of Lac Minerals Ltd. v. International Corona Resources Ltd., [1989] 2 S.C.R. 574, the elements requiring proof so to constitute a breach of confidence case are:

  • The information conveyed was confidential;
  • The information was communicated in confidence; and
  • The information was misused by the party to whom it was communicated.

Specifically, per Lac Minerals Ltd., the Supreme Court said:


I can deal quite briefly with the breach of confidence issue.  I have already indicated that Lac breached a duty of confidence owed to Corona.  The test for whether there has been a breach of confidence is not seriously disputed by the parties.  It consists in establishing three elements:  that the information conveyed was confidential, that it was communicated in confidence, and that it was misused by the party to whom it was communicated.  In Coco v. A. N. Clark (Engineers) Ltd., [1969] R.P.C. 41 (Ch.), Megarry J.  (as he then was) put it as follows at p. 47:

In my judgment, three elements are normally required if, apart from contract, a case of breach of confidence is to succeed.  First, the information itself, in the words of Lord Greene, M.R. in the Saltman case on page 215, must "have the necessary quality of confidence about it."  Secondly, that information must have been imparted in circumstances importing an obligation of confidence.  Thirdly, there must be an unauthorized use of that information to the detriment of the party communicating it . .  .

As a particularly interesting example case, Cadbury Schweppes Inc. v. FBI Foods Ltd., [1999] 1 S.C.R. 142 involved the licensing of the recipe for Clamato juice by Duffy-Mott (a company later acquired by Cadbury Schweppes Inc.) to Caesar Canning who then contracted production to FBI Foods Ltd.  After Cadbury Schweppes acquired Duffy-Mott, Caesar Canning was notified of termination of the licensing agreement; however, FBI, who later acquired assets of Caesar Canning, made use of the recipe despite a lack of authorization to do so.

Conclusion

Improper use of secretive information may constitute as the tort of breach of confidence where information was confidential, information was communicated within a confidential context, and the information was then misused by the party that received the communication.

At
Our Desk Now!
Need Help? Let's Get Started Today

NOTE: Do not send confidential information through the web form.  Use the web form only for your introduction.   Learn Why?
5

NOTE: A significant quantity of online searches related to “lawyers near me” or “best lawyer in” typically indicates an urgent requirement for competent legal assistance rather than an explicit professional designation.  In Ontario, licensed paralegals are governed by the same Law Society that supervises lawyers and possess the authority to represent clients in specific litigation issues.  Key elements of this role include advocacy, legal analysis, and procedural expertise.  Benchmark Legal Offices provides legal representation within its licensed parameters, focusing on strategic positioning, evidence preparation, and effective advocacy geared towards attaining swift and favourable resolutions for clients.

AR, BN, CA+|EN, DT, ES, FA, FR, GU, HE, HI
IT, KO, PA, PT, RU, TA, TL, UK, UR, VI, ZH
Send a Message to: Benchmark Legal Offices

NOTE: Do not send confidential details about your case.  Using this website does not establish a legal-representative/client relationship.  Use the website for your introduction with Benchmark Legal Offices. 
Privacy Policy & Cookies | Terms of Use Your IP Address is: 18.97.14.81
Benchmark Legal Offices

166 Main Street W.
Grimsby, Ontario,
L3M 1S3

P: (289) 389-8840
E: intakes@benchmarklegal.ca

Hours of Business:

09:00AM - 05:00PM
09:00AM - 05:00PM
09:00AM - 05:00PM
09:00AM - 05:00PM
09:00AM - 05:00PM
Monday:
Tuesday:
Wednesday:
Thursday:
Friday:











Assistive Controls:  |   |  A A A