Taiwan: Prepare carefully before suing former employee

Managing IP is part of Legal Benchmarking Limited, 1-2 Paris Gardens, London, SE1 8ND

Copyright © Legal Benchmarking Limited and its affiliated companies 2025

Accessibility | Terms of Use | Privacy Policy | Modern Slavery Statement

Taiwan: Prepare carefully before suing former employee

In Taiwan, in the event that a departing employee joins a competitor of his/her former employer and thus breaches his/her contract of employment containing a non-competition clause, the former employer, depending on the degree of injury, cannot only claim damages but also seek an injunction or preliminary injunction to prevent its trade secrets or other intellectual property from being divulged. Back in 2014, TSMC successfully restrained its former head of R&D department from working for Samsung in a lawsuit upheld by the Supreme Court.

This March, the Supreme Court published another verdict regarding a non-competition covenant. In this instance, a resigned employee signed a contract including a three-year non-competition clause and a confidentiality clause. So, when the employee was hired by a competitor in China soon after his resignation in 2015, the former employer filed a motion for a preliminary injunction. Both the District Court and the High Court granted the motion for the reasons that the defendant was in breach of contract and the former employer would suffer significant damages if the crucial technology it owned, which accounted for up to 96.56% of the company's total annual revenue, were passed on to its competitor.

However, after the defendant filed an appeal against the judgment by the High Court, the Supreme Court rescinded the judgment and remanded the case to the High Court for reconsideration. The Supreme Court held that the High Court did not rule on whether the consequential damages suffered by the defendant, to the extent that relevant evidence was present in the record, would be more serious than those suffered by the former employer if the motion were granted.

This case sheds light on the need for a former employer to weigh scrupulously the damages that may be suffered by the parties concerned and to prepare the relevant objective data and analysis prior to filing a motion for preliminary injunction.

liu.jpg

Frank FJ Liu


Saint Island International Patent & Law Offices7th Floor, No. 248, Section 3Nanking East RoadTaipei 105-45, Taiwan, ROCTel: +886 2 2775 1823Fax: +886 2 2731 6377siiplo@mail.saint-island.com.twwww.saint-island.com.tw

more from across site and SHARED ros bottom lb

More from across our site

Price hikes at ‘big law’ firms are pushing some clients toward boutiques that offer predictable fees, specialised expertise, and a model built around prioritising IP
The Australian side, in particular, can benefit by capitalising on its independent status to bring in more work from Western countries while still working with its former Chinese partner
Koen Bijvank of Brinkhof and Johannes Heselberger of Bardehle Pagenberg discuss the Amgen v Sanofi case and why it will be cited frequently
View the official winners of the 2025 Social Impact EMEA Awards
King & Wood Mallesons will break into two entities, 14 years after a merger between a Chinese and an Australian firm created the combined outfit
Teams from Shakespeare Martineau and DWF will take centre stage in a dispute concerning the registrability of dairy terminology in plant-based products
Senem Kayahan, attorney and founder at PatentSe, discusses how she divides prosecution tasks, and reveals the importance of empathetic client advice
The association’s Australian group has filed a formal complaint against the choice of venue, citing Dubai as an unsafe environment for the LGBTQIA+ community
Firm says appointment of Nick McDonald will boost its expertise in cross-border disputes, including at the Unified Patent Court
In the final episode of a podcast series celebrating the tenth anniversary of IP Inclusive, we discuss the IP Inclusive Charter and the senior leaders’ pledge
Gift this article