Socioeconomic crimes

The Supreme Court (TS) has ruled in favor of a former executive of an energy company who had been sued by the company for revealing trade secrets . The former employee had retained invoices and accounting documents confidential to which he had access through his work in the internal control . The documentation included significant payments to suppliers of security and amounts paid for allowances and compensation in a territorial advisory body.

In 2004, the executive and two other employees submitted part of those documents before a notary . Years later, when he was already retired, he handed over some in a criminal investigation regarding the company's payments. Furthermore, copies matching those he had kept appeared in the press. The company went to court and requested that matching copies with those that had been saved. The company went to court and requested that will stop disclosing the information , will deliver all the documentation and the ruling will be published.

Initially, both the commercial court and the provincial court considered that there had been illegal conduct . Among other reasons, they assessed that he had kept the documents for years without reporting. However, the former executive appealed to the TS, arguing that the Business Secrets Law allows revealing information to bring to light irregularities in defense of the general interest or to protect a legitimate interest.

For the TS, what was decisive was not whether the documents were secret - that was not disputed - but whether it was justified to obtain, retain, and disclose them. The TS appreciated reasonable grounds for suspicion, the high amounts, a note indicating that they should not be scanned, and the joint deposit before a notary. It also considered understandable that the employee had waited due to fear of retaliation while still employed at the company.

The TS understands that reasonable suspicions of actual or possible violations were sufficient and that, in this case, both the delivery of documents to the judicial investigation and their journalistic disclosure were protected. Therefore, it annuls the previous decisions and dismisses the company's lawsuit against the former executive. both the delivery of documents to the judicial investigation and their journalistic disclosure. Therefore, it annuls the previous decisions and dismisses the company's lawsuit against the former executive.

In actions derived from facts that could constitute a criminal offense, our lawyers are at your disposal for the defense of your rights