In fast-moving industries, confidential information and trade secrets are often among a company’s most valuable assets. When employees leave to join or set up a competitor, disputes frequently arise over how they use knowledge and data acquired during their employment.

Traditional remedies, such as damages or ordinary injunctions, may not always be sufficient where an ex-employee has gained an unlawful “head start” through misuse of confidential information. This is where springboard injunctions come in.

These are special forms of injunctive relief designed not to punish wrongdoing, but to neutralise any unfair competitive advantage gained by unlawful conduct.

Economou & Co LLC has significant experience advising and representing clients in cases involving the misuse of trade secrets, confidential information and breaches of duty. The firm has successfully obtained springboard injunctions restraining former employees and associates from exploiting unfair advantages gained through prior misconduct.

Below we explain what springboard injunctions are, when they may be granted, and why they are a vital tool for businesses seeking protection against misuse of confidential information.

1. What Is a Springboard Injunction?

A springboard injunction is a court order designed to prevent a defendant from continuing to exploit the benefits of past unlawful conduct, such as the misuse of confidential information, trade secrets, or other breaches of duty, that gave them a head start over a competitor. Its aim is not to block normal, lawful competition, but to neutralise the unfair advantage (“springboard”) derived from those prior illicit acts.

In QBE Management Services v Dymoke & Others [2012] EWHC 80 (QB), Haddon-Cave J granted springboard relief precisely because the defendants had, through misuse of confidential information and solicitation of staff, obtained what he described as a “major springboard advantage” for their new venture. The injunction was imposed “to hold the ring until the springboard advantage had expired.” In other words, the injunction “levels the playing field” by restricting the ongoing use or benefit of information or acts that would not have been available but for the prior wrongful conduct.

In a recent judgment, the Cyprus Court of Appeal relied on leading authority from the courts of England & Wales to clarify the purpose of springboard relief and the conditions for its grant in Cyprus.

2. Considerations for Granting

In QBE Management Services the Court distilled a set of eight principles that guide the grant of springboard injunctions. They remain the clearest statement of the law and have since been endorsed by the Cyprus Court of Appeal:

1. Head start from unlawful acts: A springboard injunction is appropriate in cases where defendants have obtained a material “springboard” or head start through unlawful conduct, such as breaches of duty, misuse of information or solicitation of staff or clients.
2. Purpose of the remedy: The injunction is designed to deprive the wrongdoer of the fruits of their misconduct. Its aim is not to prevent lawful competition, but to neutralise an unfair advantage.
3. Not confined to confidentiality: Relief is not limited to misuse of confidential information. It can apply to a wide range of prior unlawful conduct (e.g., breach of contract, fiduciary duty, duties of loyalty, coordinated solicitation).
4. Timeliness: The order is available only while the unfair advantage persists. If the benefit has already been spent, there is nothing to restrain.
5. Restorative effect: The court’s objective is to restore the parties to the competitive position they would have occupied but for the wrongdoing, “holding the ring” until the unfair advantage has expired.
6. Adequacy of damages: If compensation in damages would adequately address the harm, springboard relief will not normally be granted.
7. No punitive element: The injunction must not punish past breaches. It must be proportionate, targeted only at removing the advantage and lasting no longer than necessary.
8. Burden of proof: The claimant must demonstrate clearly both the existence and the likely duration of the competitive advantage. Trivial or short-lived benefits will not justify relief.

3. Purpose and Limits

A springboard injunction is not a standalone cause of action but a remedy, interim or final, available where prior unlawful acts continue to distort competition, and they are carefully calibrated to restore fairness without over-reaching.

It is important to stress that a springboard injunction is not designed to punish wrongdoing. Its role is corrective, not punitive.

The remedy:

• Prevents unfair competition – restrains the use or benefit of any unlawfully gained advantage.
• Protects legitimate business interests – particularly client lists, technical know-how, and strategic data.
• Preserves fair competition – ensuring that ex-employees may compete, but not with an illicit head start.

At the same time, courts are cautious:

• The order must not extend beyond what is necessary.
• It cannot be used to impose general non-competition where no valid covenant exists.
• It must respect the principle that employees remain free to use their general skills and experience.

4. Practical Implications for Businesses

• Employment contracts: Employers should include well-drafted confidentiality and post-termination covenants, though springboard relief may apply even without explicit clauses.
• Evidence gathering: Swift collection of proof can be decisive in court applications.
• Urgency: Timing is critical. Applications are often made on an ex parte basis to prevent further misuse.
• Duration of relief: Businesses should realistically assess how long the unfair advantage would last; for example, the time needed to approach clients or exploit confidential strategies.

5. Conclusion

Springboard injunctions are a powerful tool for businesses. They reflect the Courts’ willingness to adapt remedies to modern commercial realities where confidential information can be copied, transferred, and misused instantly. For employers, the key lessons are to maintain robust confidentiality protections, act quickly when breaches occur, and focus on neutralising the unfair advantage rather than seeking to restrict lawful competition. As Cypriot case law shows, courts are prepared to intervene decisively where the facts justify it. Springboard injunctions will continue to play a crucial role in safeguarding fair competition and protecting businesses against the misuse of their most valuable asset: information.

Economou & Co LLC continues to lead in the development and enforcement of springboard relief in Cyprus, offering strategic, timely, and effective solutions to safeguard clients’ business interests. The firm also advises companies on preventive and pre-emptive measures, such as confidentiality policies and agreements, restrictive covenants, and internal confidentiality and data-protection protocols, to protect their competitive advantage before disputes arise.

Read Also: Trade Secret Protection in Cyprus: Framework, Remedies, and Best Practices