Connecticut Trade Secret Laws: UTSA, Remedies & Deadlines

Connecticut's trade secret law, codified at Conn. Gen. Stat. §§ 35-50 to 35-58 (Chapter 625), is a 1983 adoption of the Uniform Trade Secrets Act. The statute protects qualifying confidential business information and gives an owner three years from discovery to bring a civil misappropriation claim under state law.

This guide is part of our Trade Secret Laws by State series.

Information last verified on 2026-06-25. This article presents general legal information, not legal advice. This guide covers civil trade-secret protection in Connecticut under Conn. Gen. Stat. §§ 35-50 to 35-58 and the federal DTSA; for other jurisdictions see the full Trade Secret Laws by State index.

Does Connecticut have a trade secret law?

Yes. Connecticut enacted its Trade Secrets Act in 1983, codifying it at Conn. Gen. Stat. §§ 35-50 to 35-58 in Chapter 625 of the General Statutes (Connecticut General Assembly, cga.ct.gov). The statute tracks the UTSA in its core definitions of trade secret and misappropriation, its remedies structure, and its preemption of conflicting tort claims. Connecticut courts apply the statute as a comprehensive civil remedy for the unauthorized acquisition, disclosure, or use of protected confidential business information. The state has maintained this framework without major substantive amendments since 1983. The federal Defend Trade Secrets Act of 2016 layered a parallel federal remedy on top without preempting or replacing Connecticut's law.

What counts as a trade secret and misappropriation in Connecticut?

Under § 35-51, a trade secret is information, including a formula, pattern, compilation, program, device, method, technique, or process, that: (1) derives independent economic value, actual or potential, from not being generally known to, and not being readily ascertainable by proper means by, other persons who can obtain economic value from its disclosure or use; and (2) is the subject of efforts that are reasonable under the circumstances to maintain its secrecy. Customer lists, pricing models, manufacturing processes, software source code, and supplier contracts can all qualify, provided the owner consistently protects them through confidentiality agreements, access restrictions, and employee policies.

Misappropriation under § 35-51 means acquiring a trade secret through improper means, or disclosing or using a trade secret without consent when the person knows or has reason to know it was obtained by improper means, in breach of a duty of confidentiality, or through accident or mistake where the person had notice the information was a trade secret. The statute expressly classifies reverse engineering a lawfully obtained product and independent development as proper means, so a competitor who arrives at the same information on its own has not misappropriated anything.

Remedies and the limitations period in Connecticut

A court may grant an injunction under § 35-54 to stop actual or threatened misappropriation for as long as the secret would have remained protectable, taking into account any lead-time advantage the defendant gained. Where an injunction is unworkable because the information is already in use, the court may instead impose a royalty obligation for a reasonable future period.

Section 35-55 allows recovery of actual loss caused by the misappropriation plus any unjust enrichment the defendant received that is not already captured by the actual-loss measure. If neither amount is provable, a reasonable royalty is available. When the misappropriation was willful and malicious, § 35-56 authorizes exemplary damages of up to twice the compensatory award. Attorney fees are also available under § 35-56 when misappropriation was willful and malicious, or when a claim or defense was made in bad faith.

The limitations period under § 35-57 is three years from the date the misappropriation was discovered or, by the exercise of reasonable diligence, should have been discovered. Because continuing misappropriation is treated as a single claim running from the first act the owner discovered or should have discovered, investigating suspected theft without delay is important.

How the federal DTSA applies in Connecticut

The Defend Trade Secrets Act (18 U.S.C. §§ 1836-1839, effective May 11, 2016) gives Connecticut trade-secret owners a parallel federal cause of action when the secret relates to a product or service used in, or intended for use in, interstate or foreign commerce. The DTSA limitations period is three years from discovery (§ 1836(d)), matching Connecticut's state deadline. The federal statute does not preempt Connecticut's law (18 U.S.C. § 1838), so owners regularly bring both claims together in federal court under supplemental jurisdiction.

The DTSA adds two features Connecticut's statute does not include. First, a court may issue an ex parte civil seizure order to prevent further dissemination of a secret in extraordinary circumstances (§ 1836(b)(2)). Second, under 18 U.S.C. § 1833(b)(3), any confidentiality or employment agreement signed or updated after May 11, 2016 must notify the employee of the statutory whistleblower immunity: employees cannot face civil or criminal liability for disclosing a trade secret to a government official or attorney solely to report a suspected legal violation. An employer who omits that notice from the agreement forfeits the right to recover exemplary damages and attorney fees from that employee under the DTSA, even if the theft was deliberate. Connecticut employers with post-May 2016 agreements should confirm the notice is present.

This is general legal information, not legal advice. It describes Connecticut trade-secret law under Conn. Gen. Stat. §§ 35-50 to 35-58 and the federal DTSA as of 2026-06-25 and does not address your specific facts. Trade-secret disputes are highly fact-specific and deadlines are strict. Consult an attorney licensed in Connecticut before acting.

Related articles

• Trade Secret Laws by State
• Delaware Trade Secret Laws
• Massachusetts Trade Secret Laws
• Is AI-generated code copyright infringement?

Last updated: 2026-06-25.