Musker v. English Electric Co. Ltd., 41 TC 556 (HL)

Lord Radcliffe stated (p. 585):

"There is no property right in 'know-how' that can be transferred, even in the limited sense that there is a legally protected property interest in a secret process. Special knowledge or skill can indeed ripen into a form of property in the fields of commerce and industry, as in copyright, trade-marks and designs and patents, and where such property is parted with for money what is received can be, but will not necessarily be, a receipt on capital account. But imparting of 'know-how' for reward is not like this, any more than a teacher sells his knowledge or skill to his pupil."

Sums received by the taxpayer for licensing its "manufacturing technique" for the Canberra Bomber to a number of foreign licensees were found to be receipts of its trade given that, in substance, it was receiving a reward for teaching and any diminution in the value of its know-how, when viewed as a capital asset, was far too speculative to be the basis for treating the transaction as the disposal of a capital asset.