Company shareholders in the midst of an ongoing dispute requested that the Court proceedings be held under gag order in order to protect against exposure of the company's trade secrets.
The Court held that there is no justification to impose a gag order on the proceedings. The starting point in legal proceedings is that the proceedings must be public in order to protect the public interest. While the law establishes a series of specific cases in which the Court can impose a gag order on the proceedings, including for the purpose of protecting a trade secret, in order to establish a claim for infringement of a trade secret, general statements are not enough and precise data must be provided to show that the information is indeed considered a trade secret. In addition, when the concern is a future concern, that as a result of certain procedures discussed below, the disclosure of trade secrets will be required, then there is no place to impose the publication prohibition order in the first place, but the problem can be solved on a point-by-point basis as long as the disclosure takes place in the future. Here, the data presented by the parties does not amount to a trade secret, the protection of which justifies harming the public interest of the publicity of the discussion, and the main concern expressed by the parties is a future concern about the disclosure of documents that can and will be required in the future. Thus, there is no justification at this stage, and as long as disclosure of commercial secrets is not proven, to impose a gag order on the proceedings.