Європейський досвід правового захисту конфіденційної інформації (на прикладі окремих держав)

It is established that the future of Ukraine is inevitably linked with the harmonization of its national legislation and legal system of the European Union. Additionally, it is justified that global trends toward a rapid increase in the scope of digital information and, accordingly, the rising risks of its unlawful disclosure or loss leads to need of use of effective legal instruments for the protection of confidential information. As result, it is proven that studying the advanced experience of leading European countries is necessary step toward achieving this goal. It is concluded that key role in ensuring the protection of such information is performed by Directive (EU) 2016/943 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 8 June 2016 on the protection of undisclosed know-how and business information (trade secrets) against their unlawful acquisition, use and disclosure. It is demonstrated that this soft law act serves as a foundation for shaping legal policy principles in the field of confidential information and trade secret protection across most European countries. It is established that the approaches for protection of confidential information in countries such as Germany, Belgium, the Netherlands, and Switzerland are primarily based on the provisions of this Directive. At the same time, emphasis is placed on the fact that the primary mechanism for protecting such information within contractual relations is the Non-disclosure Agreement (NDA). It is analysed that at the legislative level, neither the procedures nor the specific features of concluding such agreements are defined in any of the above-mentioned countries. Consequently, the parties are guided by the principle of freedom of contract both when entering into and executing a Non-disclosure Agreement. It is also determined that a distinctive feature of the German system of confidential information protection is the requirement for a person to have a legitimate interest in protecting the relevant information, something not defined by the text of the aforementioned EU Directive. In the Netherlands, by contrast, the roots of the confidential information protection system can be traced to provisions of criminal law. In Belgium, it is established that courts possess broad powers regarding the protection of information, including the authority to prohibit its further use at the request of an authorized party. It is justified that the Swiss approach, in turn, is based on the need to protect economic competition, with the protection of trade secrets forming an integral part of it.