Solution of the problem, an example of judicial practice and plot
The company "Ecotone" specializes in the design and manufacture of devices for water purification. The company owns several patents for inventions and a number of its original designs used as a trade secret. The greatest demand among consumers last two years, the device uses "Eco-P2", which uses a unique water purification technology that has no analogues in the world.
Participating in the exhibition, specialists of "Ecotone" found that the company "Eksima" at its booth demonstrates the device for water purification, which by its characteristics is very similar to the device "Eco-P2." The study showed that the company "Eksima" used in his unit on the same technology of water purification, which the company "Ecotone".
Since the information on the application of the technology was classified and could not be obtained through an analysis of the device "Eco-P2", the company "Ecotone" came to the conclusion that they have known of "Eksima" through some of the developers of the device. In particular, suspicion fell on the technology M., who was recently fired for repeated violations of labor discipline, and got a job in the company "Eksima."
The company "Ecotone" complained to the competition authority, in which he asked to ban the use of classified competitor technologies and to oblige Company "Eksima" not to disclose information about it to third parties. In his review of "Eksima" stated that developed the technology independently.
What are the prospects for the protection of the interests of the company "Ecotone" in this cpore? How is the burden of proof between the parties to the circumstances relevant to the case?
No feedback yet