A Warsaw-based software company discovers that a former senior developer has joined a direct competitor – and taken with him a full copy of the proprietary algorithm underpinning the firm's core product. The company has 30 days to act before evidence dissipates and interim injunctions become harder to obtain. Every hour of delay narrows the window for effective legal relief.

Polish law protects trade secrets under the Act on Combating Unfair Competition (ustawa o zwalczaniu nieuczciwej konkurencji, UCNC), which implements the EU Trade Secrets Directive. A trade secret qualifies for protection when it has commercial value, is not publicly known, and the owner has taken reasonable steps to keep it confidential. Failure to document those steps forfeits protection entirely – making pre-incident preparation the single most important factor in any enforcement strategy.

This alert covers three areas: what the current legal framework requires, who is most exposed to loss of protection, and the immediate steps businesses must take to preserve their position. The timeline is tight. Interim measures in Polish courts must be requested before evidence is destroyed or the secret loses its confidential character.

What does Polish law require to establish a protected trade secret?

Polish trade secret law sets three cumulative conditions. The information must have commercial value. It must not be generally known or readily accessible. And the owner must have taken active, documented steps to maintain confidentiality. All three must be satisfied simultaneously – courts applying the UCNC have consistently rejected claims where even one element was absent.

The National Court Register (KRS) and Polish Financial Supervision Authority (KNF) do not administer trade secret filings – there is no registration system. Protection arises automatically, but only if the owner can prove the confidentiality measures were real and proportionate. A non-disclosure agreement alone is rarely sufficient. Courts in Poland expect a layered approach: access controls, classification markings, audit logs, and employee training records.

The Industrial Property Office of the Republic of Poland (UPRP) handles patents and trademarks, but trade secrets sit outside that registry. This distinction matters. A company that could have patented an invention but chose secrecy instead bears the full burden of proving ongoing confidentiality measures. That burden increases with time. The longer a secret exists without documented protection, the harder enforcement becomes.

  • Commercial value – actual or potential competitive advantage
  • Non-public status – not accessible through ordinary channels
  • Reasonable steps – documented, proportionate confidentiality measures
  • Identifiability – the secret must be defined with sufficient precision

One practical threshold: courts have found that access granted to more than a defined, identifiable group of employees without corresponding controls can destroy the non-public character of the information. Keep distribution lists short and auditable.

Who is most exposed – and what are the immediate action items?

Technology companies, pharmaceutical firms, and manufacturers with proprietary processes face the highest exposure. So do businesses undergoing M&A due diligence, where confidential information is shared with multiple parties under time pressure. Any company that has not reviewed its confidentiality infrastructure in the past 12 months should treat this alert as an immediate trigger for action.

We secured interim injunctions protecting trade secrets worth over PLN 8m for a technology client in the Mazowieckie region (autumn 2025). The decisive factor was a pre-existing audit trail showing exactly who had accessed the relevant data and when. Without that trail, the court would have had no basis for emergency relief within the 7-day window the client needed.

The intersection with IP protection strategy for Switzerland tech companies in Poland is particularly relevant here. Cross-border operations introduce additional complexity: information shared with a Swiss parent or affiliate may lose its Polish law protection if the foreign entity's confidentiality standards are lower. Align group-wide policies before a dispute arises, not after.

GDPR Poland obligations also interact with trade secret protection. Personal data embedded in a confidential dataset – customer lists, behavioural profiles, pricing models tied to identifiable individuals – must be protected under both regimes simultaneously. A breach that triggers GDPR notification may also destroy the non-public character of the underlying trade secret. Act on both fronts in parallel.

Our team also obtained emergency preservation orders for a manufacturing client in Silesia (winter 2026), where a departing sales director had copied a customer database containing pricing strategies. The court granted the order within 5 days. The client had a signed confidentiality policy, a clear data classification scheme, and access logs – three elements that made the application straightforward.

What must you do in the next 30 days?

The 30-day window is not arbitrary. Under Polish civil procedure, interim measures protecting trade secrets are easiest to obtain while the misappropriation is recent and the evidentiary trail is fresh. After 30 days, courts scrutinise urgency claims more closely. After 90 days, a delay in filing can be treated as implied acquiescence, weakening the injunction application significantly.

DORA compliance and AI Act Poland obligations are reshaping how technology firms document their information assets. Both frameworks require detailed records of data flows, system access, and third-party dependencies. That documentation – built for regulatory purposes – doubles as evidence in trade secret litigation. Firms already investing in DORA or AI Act readiness should map that work directly onto their trade secret protection programme.

Cross-border data transfers also carry risk. The data transfer from Poland to Sweden: legal mechanisms analysis illustrates how standard contractual clauses and transfer impact assessments interact with confidentiality obligations. A transfer that is lawful under GDPR may still expose a trade secret if the recipient's security environment is inadequate. Review both simultaneously.

For businesses with complex ownership structures, the family foundation in Poland: tax advantages and setup framework is relevant where IP assets are held at foundation level. The foundation's governance documents must include explicit confidentiality obligations for beneficiaries and administrators who access commercially sensitive information.

Immediate action checklist – complete within 30 days:

  • Audit which information assets qualify as trade secrets and document their commercial value
  • Review and update NDAs with employees, contractors, and business partners
  • Implement access controls and classification markings with audit logs
  • Map data flows involving cross-border transfers and align with GDPR obligations
  • Brief key personnel on confidentiality obligations and document the training

An IP lawyer Warsaw-based clients can instruct should assess whether existing protection measures meet the "reasonable steps" threshold before any dispute arises. Retrofitting a protection programme after misappropriation is possible but far more expensive – and courts are less sympathetic to owners who acted only after the loss.

The specific situation of your business requires an honest assessment of whether current measures would survive judicial scrutiny. Gaps identified now can be closed within weeks. Gaps identified during litigation cannot be remedied retroactively – and that consequence is irreversible.

To receive an expert assessment of your trade secret protection programme, contact info@kordeckipartners.com.

KORDECKI & Partners is a law firm based in Warsaw and Krakow, advising business clients across 30 jurisdictions. Our team combines expertise in Polish and international law with a practical approach to IP protection, trade secret enforcement, and technology law. We work with Polish entrepreneurs, foreign investors, and in-house legal teams. To discuss your situation, contact info@kordeckipartners.com.

Disclaimer: This publication is provided for informational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. The information herein should not be relied upon as a substitute for professional legal counsel tailored to your specific circumstances. KORDECKI & Partners assumes no liability for actions taken or not taken based on the contents of this material. For advice regarding your particular situation, please contact info@kordeckipartners.com.