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However, after the defendant filed an appeal against the judgment by the High Court, the Supreme Court rescinded the judgment and remanded the case to the High Court for reconsideration.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

Lawyers at Lavoix provide an overview of the UPC’s approach to inventive step and whether the forum is promoting its own approach rather than following the EPO
Andrew Blattman, who helped IPH gain significant ground in Asia and Canada, will leave in the second half of 2026
The court ordering a complainant to rank its arguments in order of potential success and a win for Edwards Lifesciences were among the top developments in recent weeks
Frederick Lee has rejoined Boies Schiller Flexner, bolstering the firm’s capabilities across AI, media, and entertainment
Nirav Desai and Sasha S Rao at Sterne, Kessler, Goldstein & Fox explore how companies’ efforts to manage tariffs by altering corporate structures can undermine their ability to assert their patents and recover damages
Monika Żuraw, founder of Żuraw & Partners, discusses why IP should be part of the foundation of a business, and taking on projects that others walk away from
Lawyers say attention will turn to the UK government’s AI consultation after judgment fails to match pre-trial hype
Susan Keston and Rachel Fetches at HGF explain why the CoA’s decision to grant the UPC’s first permanent injunction demonstrates the court’s readiness to diverge from national court judgments
IP, M&A, life sciences and competition partners advised on deal that brings together brands such as ‘Huggies’ and ‘Kleenex’ with ‘Band-Aid’ and ‘Tylenol’
Stability AI, represented by Bird & Bird, is not liable for secondary copyright infringement, though Fieldfisher client Getty succeeds in some trademark claims
Gift this article