Chad was the best private detective in the west. His system for tracking persons who had caused themselves to disappear was markedly superior to that of others. Sally, his only assistant, was considered so valuable that he had her sign five-year contracts with non-disclosure clauses. Sally took notes at a private meeting between Chad and a representative of the RCMP who was negotiating a contract with Chad to track down two criminals. Sally and Chad took care that the discussions were understood to be confidential-regarding the information shared both by the RCMP and by Chad about his methods. Sally was approached by a competitor of Chad, Mr. Adolph, who offered her three times her current salary if she would break her contract with Chad, sign with him, and bring him information about Chad's tracking system. After some months, she did just that. Furthermore, she shared with Adolph the information given to Chad by the RCMP, which caused the RCMP embarrassment, time, and money. Which of the following is true?
▸ Chad could sue Sally for disclosing the information only if he had signed a non-disclosure clause.
▸ Sally owes no fiduciary duty to Chad even though she had a trusted position as an employee.
▸ The RCMP could not sue Chad for breach of confidence because the information disclosed by Sally was not novel know-how that was giving the RCMP the cutting edge in business competition.
▸ Chad could sue Adolph for the tort of passing-off.
▸ Chad could sue Sally for breach of her employment contract, not only on the clause relating to the term of her employment, but also on the non-disclosure clause.
Quick Reply
