Non-compete release does not equal consent to disclose trade secrets; employees remain bound by confidentiality obligations.

The Supreme Court dismissed the cassation appeal against a regional court's decision to reject the employer's claim for damages. The employer argued that releasing other employees from non-compete obligations did not constitute consent for current employees to disclose trade secrets. The court held that non-compete release and confidentiality obligations are distinct legal concepts, with the former not implying the latter. Consequently, the court ruled that the employer's decision to release some employees did not invalidate the confidentiality duty owed by those who remained bound.