Breach of Confidence: Improper Use of Business Information Including Trade Secrets | VP Legal Services & Notary
Helpful?
Yes No Share to Facebook

Breach of Confidence:

Improper Use of Business Information Including Trade Secrets



Last Updated: July 04 2026

Question: What does breach of confidence mean in Ontario when someone misuses confidential business information someone shared with them?

Answer: If you’re in Ontario and someone misuses confidential business recipes, proprietary processes, software, or other non-public information they received, a paralegal or notary at VP Legal Services & Notary can help you understand whether it may amount to breach of confidence (often requiring that the information had a necessary quality of confidence, was communicated in circumstances importing an obligation of confidence, and was then misused) and help you take practical next steps such as reviewing what was shared, documenting how misuse occurred, and preparing communications or filings for legal processes; to speak with their team about your specific situation, call (437) 286-1499 for a free 1/4-hour 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. The field of tort law includes a cause of action, meaning right to bring a lawsuit, known as breach of confidence which relates to the improper use of information by a person or other business with whom the confidential information was previously shared. Interestingly, where breach of confidence involves information that was previously shared, the wrongfulness arises from improper use of the information rather than theft of the information.

The Law

As per the case of Lac Minerals Ltd. v. International Corona Resources Ltd., [1989] 2 S.C.R. 574, a Supreme Court decision, the elements that must be proven within 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.

Get a FREE ¼ HOUR CONSULTATION

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?
6

NOTE: An extensive array of inquiries such as “lawyers in my area” or “top lawyer in” frequently indicates a desire for prompt and competent legal counsel instead of a particular designation.  In Ontario, certified paralegals are governed by the same Law Society that regulates lawyers and are permitted to represent clients in specified litigation issues.  Their role is grounded in advocacy, legal reasoning, and procedural expertise.  VP Legal Services & Notary offers legal representation within its sanctioned mandate, focusing on strategic positioning, evidence preparation, and compelling advocacy aimed at securing effective and advantageous outcomes 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: VP Legal Services & Notary

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 VP Legal Services & Notary. 
Privacy Policy & Cookies | Terms of Use Your IP Address is: 216.73.216.72
VP Legal Services & Notary

80 Carlauren Road, Suite 23
Woodbridge, Ontario,
L4L 7Z5
 
P: (437) 286-1499
E: vanessa@vplegal.services

Business Hours:

09:00AM - 08:00PM
09:00AM - 08:00PM
09:00AM - 08:00PM
09:00AM - 08:00PM
09:00AM - 08:00PM
Monday:
Tuesday:
Wednesday:
Thursday:
Friday:

By appointment only.  Call for details.
Messages may be left anytime.






Assistive Controls:  |   |  A A A