CYPRUS Trends and Developments Contributed by: Alexandros Gavrielides and Demetris Yiannakou, Scordis, Papapetrou & Co LLC
In another case, Application No 1094/2024 of the Dis- trict Court of Limassol, Phadisco Limited ν I.P. and another judgment, dated 10/6/2025, the court grant- ed an injunction prohibiting a former employee of the applicant from disclosing or misusing any confidential information obtained during his employment with the applicant and from contacting or soliciting any of the applicant’s clients, partners or suppliers. The court found that the respondent, acting in breach of his fidu- ciary and confidentiality duties, took advantage of his position within the company, the connections and per- sonal relationships he developed with the applicant’s partners and suppliers during his employment, the confidential information he had access to as a result of that employment and the documents and other evi- dence presented by the applicant, all demonstrated that the respondent had taken advantage of his posi- tion in order to set up a company intended to oper- ate in direct competition with the applicant and that his actions enabled him to gain an unfair competitive advantage over his former employer. In delivering its judgement the court held that “ … it appears that the respondent, in breach of the terms of the employment contract, as well as the duties of loyalty, confidentiality and trust and the obligations emerging from Law 164 (I)/2020 which he owed to the applicants due to the senior position held in them, acted covertly during his employment by establishing and promoting a competing company for his own per- sonal interests, namely the second defendants, using confidential information he had acquired, that is all confidential information, data, and contacts related to Surveal and Charles de Giorgio Ltd. As a result of his conduct, the applicants have suffered extensive damages, both financially and to their reputation as a company within their sector. From the above facts, there is no longer any doubt that the respondent has now gained a head start or unfair advantage at the expense of the applicants. ” Similarly, in Application No 2/2025 of the District Court of Limassol, Primexm Technologies ltd ν Stefan Pop - ivoda , judgement dated 30/6/2025, the applicant, a company providing cutting-edge trading technology software solutions/infrastructure services for financial institution clients in Cyprus and abroad, alleged that
the respondent, who was appointed as the Global Head of Relationship Management in the applicant and in the group of companies in which the appli- cant belongs to, misused the confidential information obtained during his employment with the applicant in order to harm the applicant and gain an unfair advan- tage in the form of commissions for introducing clients from the group’s client base to his new employers. The court granted an injunction restraining the respondent from continuing to misuse the applicant’s confidential information and from contacting or entering into any agreements or transactions with the applicant’s clients for a period of 12 months. Key takeaways • Springboard injunctions can be a very effective form of relief in cases where former employees attempt to gain a head start or an unfair com- petitive advantage over their former employer by actions which amount to breaches of their express or implied duties of loyalty and confidentiality. • The Cypriot courts have shown an increased will- ingness to grant springboard relief in appropriate cases while stressing, at the same time, the impor- tance of striking a balance between protecting the legitimate business interests of employers and not imposing unjustifiable restrictions on the freedom of former employees to use the skills and know- how acquired in the course of their employment in order to complete with their former employers. • Springboard injunctions are a temporary form of relief and should only last as long as is absolutely necessary in order to eliminate the unfair advan- tage gained by the former employee through their unlawful activities. • Timing is of the essence insofar as springboard relief is concerned. Employers should act promptly while the former employee’s unlawful competi- tive advantage still lasts. Delay in seeking relief significantly reduces the likelihood of obtaining it, especially on an ex parte basis. This is particularly important in Cyprus, where long delays in deter- mining applications made with notice are not unu- sual and where the benefit of obtaining the relief may well have disappeared by the time the court examines the application.
258 CHAMBERS.COM
Powered by FlippingBook