No. Confidentiality is different from the statutory knowledge standard. The case must explain the actual expertise and its relevance.
Make the substantive claim understandable
Describe the kind of problem and the employee’s capability without assuming secrecy proves qualification. Publicly known information can also be relevant if the actual standard is met.
Qualifying specialized knowledge is either special knowledge about organizational products and services, research and equipment, techniques and management, or other interests—and how they apply in international markets—or an advanced level of knowledge about the organization’s processes and procedures. The file still needs a qualifying relationship between the entities, the required period of continuous qualifying employment abroad within the relevant preceding period, and special knowledge of the employer's products, services, or advanced processes that the assigned work actually uses. Mark later summaries honestly, explain missing records, and show why the applicant's knowledge concerns this organization's interests or reaches an advanced level in its processes rather than reflecting ordinary occupational ability. Uniqueness is not required, so there is no need to claim that nobody else understands the system; what is needed is a factual description of knowledge built inside the organisation over time and applied to identifiable pieces of work. What must be shown is knowledge that is special or advanced within the organisation and genuinely applied in the proposed duties; breadth of exposure describes a career, and it does not become the legal standard by being long.