This is perhaps the most recent example of the widespread use of a confidentiality agreement (NDA), including for commercial, personal or other purposes. This article highlights some of the problems related to the cross-border applicability of NAs offences. The first part will examine the possibility of imposing „sanctions“ for non-compliance with NOAs and how (for example) the disputed Australian legislation is dealt with. The second part outlines some of the remedies available in the event of a breach of the NOA and considers whether the parties to their NOA should provide for recourse to the Court of Justice or the enforcement of arbitration. The third part of this article examines the possibility of applying foreign judgments regarding NDA violations and outlines practical considerations for interested parties. Given the size of transnational trade and the emphasis on transparency in international trade, it is more important than ever to get your NDA in order. In accordance with Article 2 of the Commercial Arbitration Act 2010, the commercial arbitration body is responsible for settling the following types of disputes: although obtaining a judgment in your favour for violating an NDA is a step in the right direction, it is not necessarily the complete solution for all relevant jurisdictions. This depends on the enforceability of foreign judgments in national courts. In Australia, for example, legislation on the recognition and enforcement of certain foreign court decisions is provided for by the Foreign Judgments Act 1991 (FJA). What is remarkable, however, is that there is no general legal application between the United States and Australia. In order to apply for a judgment of the United States Court in Australia, applicants must refer to the principles of common law in application. The fact that the VIAC applies section 2 of the Commercial Arbitration Act 2010 (which applied „disputes between parties involved in at least one party in commercial activities“) to recognize its own jurisdiction over AND litigation itself, raises the question: Are AND disputes defined as a labour dispute or commercial civil dispute? It goes without saying that determining the good nature of the legal relationship in litigation is the reason why the jurisdiction of the dispute resolution body is properly determined. In a unilateral NOA (where the agreement is primarily in favour of one of the parties that will provide information), the jurisdiction and choice of the law are generally determined by the publishing party.