Bevisbörda i mål om utnyttjande av företagshemligheter
(2015) JURM02 20151Department of Law
- Abstract (Swedish)
- Denna uppsats behandlar bevisbörda vid utnyttjande i mål om företagshemligheter. I huvudsak fokuserar uppsatsen på en hypotetisk situation då en näringsidkare fått sin företagshemlighet överförd till en konkurrent på ett olovlig och obehörigt sätt. Detta kan hända vid t.ex. brustna avtalsförhandlingar eller då en tidigare anställd för med sig företagshemligheter till sin nya arbetsgivare.
Uppsatsen utreder i första hand vad som utgör ”utnyttjande” i mål om företagshemligheter. Kan utnyttjande av en företagshemlighet i internt utvecklingsarbete eller som uteslutningsmetod utgöra ”utnyttjande” enligt Lag (1990:409) om skydd för företagshemligheter (FHL)? Utredningen konstaterar att så är fallet eftersom det annars uppkommer en orimlig... (More) - Denna uppsats behandlar bevisbörda vid utnyttjande i mål om företagshemligheter. I huvudsak fokuserar uppsatsen på en hypotetisk situation då en näringsidkare fått sin företagshemlighet överförd till en konkurrent på ett olovlig och obehörigt sätt. Detta kan hända vid t.ex. brustna avtalsförhandlingar eller då en tidigare anställd för med sig företagshemligheter till sin nya arbetsgivare.
Uppsatsen utreder i första hand vad som utgör ”utnyttjande” i mål om företagshemligheter. Kan utnyttjande av en företagshemlighet i internt utvecklingsarbete eller som uteslutningsmetod utgöra ”utnyttjande” enligt Lag (1990:409) om skydd för företagshemligheter (FHL)? Utredningen konstaterar att så är fallet eftersom det annars uppkommer en orimlig ”lucka” i förhållande till utfärdandet av förbud enligt 11§ FHL samt interimistiska förbud enligt 13 § FHL. En annan tolkning skulle nämligen leda till att käranden var tvungen att vänta till dess att ett externt utnyttjande (angrepp) har skett, vilket nödvändigtvis inte kommer ske, innan ett förbud kan utfärdas.
I andra hand utreder uppsatsen vem som har bevisbördan för att ett sådant internt utnyttjande har skett. Utredningen konstaterar att rådande placering av bevisbördan faller enbart på käranden vilket inte kan anses rimligt med tanke på hur svårt det är för käranden att föra bevisning om vad som skett internt i en konkurrerande verksamhet. Bevisbördan bör således omplaceras. Rimligen sker detta genom en s.k. omvänd bevisbörda där käranden behöver göra sannolikt att ett utnyttjande har skett varpå bevisbördan övergår på svaranden som måste styrka att ett sådant utnyttjande inte skett för att inte ansvar ska föreligga. En omvänd bevisbörda är i linje med hur bevisbördan placeras vid liknande bevissvårigheter inom andra rättsområden samt vissa allmänna principer om bevisbörda. (Less) - Abstract
- The topic for discussion in this essay is burden of proof within the Swedish regulation for protection of trade secrets )Lag (1990:409) om skydd för företagshemligheter (FHL)). The essay mainly focuses on a hypothetical situation where trade secrets of a business have been unlawfully transferred to another business. This could, for example, happen after abandoned contract negotiations or when a former employee brings with him trade secrets from his former employer to his new one.
Firstly, the essay investigates what constitutes “usage” of a trade secret within the Swedish regulation for protection of trade secrets. Could usage of trade secrets in form of internal use within an organization constitute “usage” according to FHL? The... (More) - The topic for discussion in this essay is burden of proof within the Swedish regulation for protection of trade secrets )Lag (1990:409) om skydd för företagshemligheter (FHL)). The essay mainly focuses on a hypothetical situation where trade secrets of a business have been unlawfully transferred to another business. This could, for example, happen after abandoned contract negotiations or when a former employee brings with him trade secrets from his former employer to his new one.
Firstly, the essay investigates what constitutes “usage” of a trade secret within the Swedish regulation for protection of trade secrets. Could usage of trade secrets in form of internal use within an organization constitute “usage” according to FHL? The investigation concludes that so has to be the case, as a different point of view would lead to an unreasonable blockage in regard to interim measures. This blockage would mean that in order to issue an interim measure one would have to wait until the trade secret has been used externally, which might not ever happen.
Secondly, the essay investigates who has the burden of proof for such an internal usage of trade secrets. The investigation concludes that currently the whole burden falls upon the attacked business which might not seem reasonable considering how hard it is for this party to provide proof of how a trade secret has been used internally within another business. The investigation suggests that the burden of proof is reformed. Preferably, the current burden of proof is replaced with a reversed burden of proof which means that the attacked business would only have to make it likely that an internal usage has taken place and then the burden of proof would fall upon the potential user who would have to prove that there has been no internal usage of trade secrets. Such a reform would be in line with the burden of proof within other areas of law and some commonly used principals for burden of proof within Swedish law. (Less)
Please use this url to cite or link to this publication:
http://lup.lub.lu.se/student-papers/record/5432235
- author
- Mansnerus Lund, Henrik LU
- supervisor
- organization
- alternative title
- Burden of proof in regard to use of trade secrets
- course
- JURM02 20151
- year
- 2015
- type
- H3 - Professional qualifications (4 Years - )
- subject
- keywords
- förmögenhetsrätt
- language
- Swedish
- id
- 5432235
- date added to LUP
- 2015-06-16 14:36:29
- date last changed
- 2015-06-18 14:04:24
@misc{5432235,
abstract = {{The topic for discussion in this essay is burden of proof within the Swedish regulation for protection of trade secrets )Lag (1990:409) om skydd för företagshemligheter (FHL)). The essay mainly focuses on a hypothetical situation where trade secrets of a business have been unlawfully transferred to another business. This could, for example, happen after abandoned contract negotiations or when a former employee brings with him trade secrets from his former employer to his new one.
Firstly, the essay investigates what constitutes “usage” of a trade secret within the Swedish regulation for protection of trade secrets. Could usage of trade secrets in form of internal use within an organization constitute “usage” according to FHL? The investigation concludes that so has to be the case, as a different point of view would lead to an unreasonable blockage in regard to interim measures. This blockage would mean that in order to issue an interim measure one would have to wait until the trade secret has been used externally, which might not ever happen.
Secondly, the essay investigates who has the burden of proof for such an internal usage of trade secrets. The investigation concludes that currently the whole burden falls upon the attacked business which might not seem reasonable considering how hard it is for this party to provide proof of how a trade secret has been used internally within another business. The investigation suggests that the burden of proof is reformed. Preferably, the current burden of proof is replaced with a reversed burden of proof which means that the attacked business would only have to make it likely that an internal usage has taken place and then the burden of proof would fall upon the potential user who would have to prove that there has been no internal usage of trade secrets. Such a reform would be in line with the burden of proof within other areas of law and some commonly used principals for burden of proof within Swedish law.}},
author = {{Mansnerus Lund, Henrik}},
language = {{swe}},
note = {{Student Paper}},
title = {{Bevisbörda i mål om utnyttjande av företagshemligheter}},
year = {{2015}},
}