Trade secrets (including so-called tricks of the trade) are commonly protected by confidentiality agreements, non-disclosure agreements and exclusivity clauses or contracts. Exclusivity clauses are often attacked as being null and void on grounds of public policy because they restrain trade or occupation unreasonably. In Avon Cosmetics Incorporated v Leticia Luna, GR No 153674, dated December 20 2006, the Supreme Court ruled on an exclusivity clause. The facts of the case are as follows: In 1978 Avon acquired Beautifont Inc, a Philippine company, where Luna was an employee. In 1985, Luna and Avon signed the so-called Supervisor's Agreement. This had the following terms: (i) that the Agreement does not make the Supervisor an employee or agent of the Company (ii) that the Supervisor is an independent retailer/dealer and has sole discretion to determine where and how Avon's products will be sold, except that the Supervisor cannot sell such products to stores, supermarkets or to any person who sells things at a fixed place of business, (iii) that the Supervisor shall sell or offer to sell, display or promote only and exclusively products sold by the Company; (iv) that either party may terminate the agreement at will, or without cause, at any time upon notice to the other.
