30 THE LAW AFFECTING ENGINEERS 



master and servant had terminated before it was carried out. 

 So to hold would be a great encouragement to fraud. In what 

 I have said I do not intend to convey that while the contract 

 of service exists a person intending to enter into business for 

 himself may not do anything by way of preparation, provided 

 only that he does not, when serving his master, fraudulently 

 undermine him by breaking the confidence reposed in him." 



20. Injunction to restrain disclosure of confidential infor- 

 mation. Not only will the Court grant an injunction, but if the 

 injunction is disobeyed the defendant may be imprisoned for 

 contempt of Court. That is what happened in the case of 

 Helmore v. Smith, 1886, 35 Ch. D. 449. In that case the 

 defendant had been employed by his father in business. The 

 business having been placed in the hands of a receiver and 

 manager, under an order of Court, the son proceeded to circu- 

 larise the customers, stating that the original business had 

 been wound up, and that he was in a position to execute 

 orders. In doing this he made use of information acquired 

 by him while his father carried on the business. Upon his 

 refusing to desist from this course, the judge sent him to 

 prison for contempt of Court. 



In Lamb v. Evans, 1893, 1 Ch. 218, certain canvassers who 

 had been employed under agreements which bound them to 

 devote themselves in a particular district exclusively to obtain- 

 ing from traders advertisements to be inserted in a directory, 

 and to supply the blocks and materials necessary for producing 

 such advertisements, proposed at the expiration of their agree- 

 ments to assist a rival publication in procuring similar 

 advertisements. It was decided that they were not entitled 

 to use for the purposes of any other publication the materials 

 which they had obtained for the purpose of this particular 

 directory while in the plaintiff's employ. 



21. Trade secrets protected by the Factory Act, 1901. The 

 fact that trade secrets are the property of the employer is 

 recognised by the Factory Act, 1901. By sect. 116 of that 

 Act, which specifies the particulars of work or wages which 

 must be given to piece-workers, it is provided in sub-sect. 

 (3) that if any one engaged as a worker in a factory, having 

 received any such particulars, whether they are furnished 



