Springboard injunction
 | This article, Springboard injunction, has recently been created via the Articles for creation process. Please check to see if the reviewer has accidentally left this template after accepting the draft and take appropriate action as necessary.
Reviewer tools: Inform author |
A springboard injunction is a specific type of court order issued in English and Welsh law, which is typically used to prevent a former employee from misusing their former employer's confidential information.
The classic, albeit very wide definition of the springboard injunction was given by Roxburgh J in Terrapin Ltd v Builders’ Supply Co (Hayes) Ltd [1967] RPC 375[1], namely that it is an injunction whereby a party is: “placed under a special disability in the field of competition in order to ensure that he does not get an unfair start."[1]
In recent years however the springboard injunction has been confined to cases where former employees threaten to abuse confidential information acquired during the currency of their employment.
What criteria needs to be satisfied to obtain a springboard injunction
Springboard injunctions must meet the pre-requisite conditions that are standard for the granting of injunctions[2], however, there are additional criteria that the court must be satisfied with before this particular type of relief[3]:
- There must be a misuse of confidential information by the former employee and/or past breaches of contract either the former employee or others they might be acting in concert with (UBS Wealth Management (UK) Ltd & Another v Vestra Wealth LLP & Oth [2008] EWHC 1974 ) [4].
- The former employees must have an unfair advantage as a result of the breaches of contract and the unfair advantage must still exist at the time the injunction is sought (Sun Valley Foods Ltd v Vincent [2000] FSR 825).
- There must be a risk of future economic loss to the former employer which is caused by the former employees’ unfair advantage[4].
- The sole and intended purpose of the injunction is to protect against future losses; not to punish previous breaches by the former employee[4].
- The seriousness of the breach of the former employee's conduct cannot have any bearing on the period for which the injunction should be granted. The court will only consider the effect of the breach upon the former employer in the sense of the extent to which the former employee has gained as an illegitimate advantage (Sectrack NV v Satamatics Ltd [2007] EWHC 3003[5]).
References
- ^ a b dls (2021-01-20). "Terrapin v Builders Supply Co (Hayes): ChD 1967". swarb.co.uk. Retrieved 2021-03-28.
- ^ "PART 25 - INTERIM REMEDIES AND SECURITY FOR COSTS - Civil Procedure Rules". www.justice.gov.uk. Retrieved 2021-03-28.
- ^ "Alston Asquith | Springboard Injunctions".
{{cite web}}: CS1 maint: url-status (link) - ^ a b c "UBS Wealth Management (UK) Ltd v Vestra Wealth Llp [2008] EWHC 1974 (QB) (04 August 2008)". www.bailii.org. Retrieved 2021-03-28.
- ^ "Sectrack NV v Satamatics Ltd & Anor [2007] EWHC 3003 (Comm) (19 December 2007)". www.bailii.org. Retrieved 2021-03-28.
| This article, Springboard injunction, has recently been created via the Articles for creation process. Please check to see if the reviewer has accidentally left this template after accepting the draft and take appropriate action as necessary.
Reviewer tools: Inform author |