Kentucky Non-Disclosure Agreement Requirements
Kentucky also has no statute limiting what an employer can require an employee to assign in an invention-assignment clause, unlike a handful of other states, so the carve-out protection an NDA drafter might expect from California or Kansas law does not exist here.
Introduction
Kentucky also has no statute limiting what an employer can require an employee to assign in an invention-assignment clause, unlike a handful of other states, so the carve-out protection an NDA drafter might expect from California or Kansas law does not exist here. Trade secrets shared under a Kentucky NDA are protected separately under the Kentucky Uniform Trade Secrets Act (KRS 365.880 to 365.900), and a misappropriation claim generally must be filed within three years of when the misappropriation was discovered or reasonably should have been. Kentucky has no statute setting the rules for a non-compete or restrictive covenant embedded in an NDA either; the Kentucky Supreme Court's 2014 decision in Charles T. Creech, Inc. v. Brown settled the modern rule instead, holding that an existing employee's continued at-will employment, by itself, is not enough consideration to make such a covenant enforceable. A Non-Disclosure Agreement in Kentucky is otherwise an ordinary, enforceable confidentiality contract, mutual or one-way, that lets the parties agree to keep specified information secret. If a Kentucky NDA also asks an existing employee to agree not to compete or not to solicit, the employer needs to give something in return, such as a raise, a promotion, specialized training, or a changed working relationship, or that provision risks being unenforceable for lack of consideration, on top of the ordinary reasonableness test Kentucky courts apply to any restrictive covenant. The practical effect for drafting is that a Kentucky NDA should stick to confidentiality terms unless the employer is prepared to provide new consideration for anything that looks like a non-compete or non-solicit provision.
0/5000
Key Things to Know
- 1
Kentucky has no employee invention-assignment carve-out statute, unlike states such as California, Kansas, or Illinois. A Kentucky NDA or employment agreement can require broader invention assignment than those states would allow, subject only to ordinary contract law and whatever public policy limits a court chooses to apply case by case.
- 2
That consideration rule applies to any restrictive covenant Kentucky courts review, including a non-compete or non-solicitation clause folded into an NDA. Without new consideration, such as a raise, a promotion, or specialized training, that kind of clause risks being unenforceable even if its scope is otherwise reasonable.
- 3
Trade secret protection runs through the Kentucky Uniform Trade Secrets Act (KRS 365.880 to 365.900), separate from whatever the NDA itself says.
- 4
A trade secret misappropriation claim in Kentucky generally must be filed within three years of when the misappropriation was discovered or reasonably should have been discovered (KRS 365.890), and a continuing misappropriation counts as a single claim rather than restarting the clock with each new use or disclosure.
- 5
Kentucky has no statute governing non-compete or restrictive-covenant enforceability. Instead, the Kentucky Supreme Court's 2014 decision in Charles T. Creech, Inc. v. Brown, 433 S.W.3d 345 (Ky. 2014), holds that an existing employee's continued at-will employment, standing alone, is not sufficient consideration to support a non-compete-type covenant; the employer must give something else in exchange.
- 6
Mutual NDAs, where both sides share confidential information, and one-way NDAs, where only one side does, are both ordinary enforceable contracts in Kentucky; which one fits depends on whether the exchange runs both directions, like a partnership or acquisition discussion, or one direction, like pitching an investor.
- 7
A Kentucky court can order injunctive relief to stop an ongoing or threatened breach of a valid NDA, in addition to any damages the disclosure caused.
Key decisions before you file
Before you file a Non-Disclosure Agreement in Kentucky, a few decisions shape the document: which option to choose and what each one means. The Non-Disclosure Agreement guide walks through them.
Open the Non-Disclosure Agreement guideCustomize your Non-Disclosure Agreement Template with DocDraft
Kentucky Requirements for Non-Disclosure Agreement
Definition of Confidential Information (Kentucky Uniform Trade Secrets Act, KRS 365.880 to 365.900)
Clearly defines what constitutes confidential information under Kentucky law, including trade secrets as defined in the Kentucky Uniform Trade Secrets Act.
Federal Trade Secret Protection (Defend Trade Secrets Act of 2016, 18 U.S.C. Section 1836 et seq.)
Acknowledges protection under the federal Defend Trade Secrets Act, which provides federal jurisdiction for trade secret misappropriation and allows for civil seizure of property in extraordinary circumstances.
Exclusions from Confidential Information (Kentucky Uniform Trade Secrets Act, KRS 365.880 to 365.900)
Identifies information not considered confidential under Kentucky law, such as publicly available information, information independently developed, or information rightfully received from third parties, consistent with the trade secret definition in KRS 365.880.
Obligations of Receiving Party (Kentucky Uniform Trade Secrets Act, KRS 365.880 to 365.900)
Details the specific duties of the party receiving confidential information, including maintaining secrecy, limiting access to information, and using appropriate safeguards, consistent with the reasonable-efforts-to-maintain-secrecy standard in KRS 365.880(4)(b).
Remedies for Breach (Kentucky Uniform Trade Secrets Act, KRS 365.882, 365.884, and 365.886)
Outlines available remedies in case of breach: injunctive relief for actual or threatened misappropriation under KRS 365.882, damages under KRS 365.884, and attorney's fees under KRS 365.886 where misappropriation was willful and malicious or a claim was pursued or resisted in bad faith.
Non-Solicitation Provisions (Kentucky Common Law on Restrictive Covenants)
Kentucky has no statute governing non-solicitation or non-compete enforceability; courts apply a common-law reasonableness test considering the subject matter, the nature of the business, and the circumstances of the case. Critically, under the Kentucky Supreme Court's decision in Charles T. Creech, Inc. v. Brown, 433 S.W.3d 345 (Ky. 2014), an existing employee's continued at-will employment alone is not sufficient consideration to support a non-solicitation or non-compete covenant; the employer must give something additional, such as a raise, a promotion, or specialized training, or the covenant risks being unenforceable regardless of how reasonable its scope is.
Electronic Signatures Compliance (Kentucky Uniform Electronic Transactions Act, KRS 369.101 to 369.120, and Electronic Signatures in Global and National Commerce Act, 15 U.S.C. Section 7001)
Acknowledges the validity of electronic signatures in accordance with both Kentucky's Uniform Electronic Transactions Act and the federal ESIGN Act, allowing for electronic execution of the NDA.
Disclosure Required by Law (Kentucky Rules of Civil Procedure CR 26.03 and Federal Rules of Civil Procedure Rule 26)
Addresses situations where disclosure may be required by law, court order, or governmental authority, requiring the receiving party to provide prompt notice to allow the disclosing party to seek a protective order. CR 26.03 is Kentucky's actual protective-order rule governing a party's or discovery target's ability to limit compelled disclosure in litigation.
Compliance with Securities Laws (Securities Exchange Act of 1934, 15 U.S.C. Section 78j(b), and SEC Rule 10b-5)
Acknowledges that certain confidential information may constitute material non-public information under federal securities laws, prohibiting insider trading based on such information. This is particularly important for NDAs related to investment discussions.
Relationship of Parties (Kentucky Business Entity Laws, KRS Chapters 271B, 275, and 362)
Clarifies that the NDA does not create any agency, partnership, or joint venture relationship between the parties. KRS 362.175, part of Kentucky's partnership law, defines a partnership as an association of two or more persons to carry on as co-owners a business for profit, the statutory test a court would apply to decide whether this Agreement inadvertently created one.