Pilkadaris v Asian Tour: Restraint of Trade in Professional Golf
In Pilkadaris Terry and others v Asian Tour (Tournament Players Division) Pte Ltd and another, the Singapore High Court ruled in favor of the plaintiffs, professional golfers, declaring Regulation 1.10 of the Asian Tour's 2009 and 2010 regulations as an unenforceable and null restraint of trade. The plaintiffs challenged the regulation that restricted their participation in golf tournaments outside the Asian Tour, particularly those organized by OneAsia. The court found the regulation unreasonable and issued injunctions to prevent the Asian Tour from enforcing it, ordering the repayment of fines imposed on the plaintiffs.
1. Case Overview
1.1 Court
High Court1.2 Outcome
Judgment for the plaintiffs.
1.3 Case Type
Civil
1.4 Judgment Type
Grounds of Decision
1.5 Jurisdiction
Singapore
1.6 Description
The High Court found Asian Tour's Regulation 1.10, restricting members from playing in competing tournaments, an unreasonable restraint of trade.
1.7 Decision Date
2. Parties and Outcomes
| Party Name | Role | Type | Outcome | Outcome Type | Counsels |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Pilkadaris Terry | Plaintiff | Individual | Judgment for Plaintiff | Won | Christopher Anand Daniel, Ganga Avadiar, Harjean Kaur |
| Matthew James Griffin | Plaintiff | Individual | Judgment for Plaintiff | Won | Christopher Anand Daniel, Ganga Avadiar, Harjean Kaur |
| Guido Van Der Valk | Plaintiff | Individual | Judgment for Plaintiff | Won | Christopher Anand Daniel, Ganga Avadiar, Harjean Kaur |
| Anis Helmi Hassan | Plaintiff | Individual | Judgment for Plaintiff | Won | Christopher Anand Daniel, Ganga Avadiar, Harjean Kaur |
| Asian Tour (Tournament Players Division) Pte Ltd | Defendant | Corporation | Claim Dismissed | Lost | Simon Yuen |
| Asian Tour Ltd | Defendant | Corporation | Judgment against Defendant | Lost | Simon Yuen |
3. Judges
| Judge Name | Title | Delivered Judgment |
|---|---|---|
| Judith Prakash | Judge | Yes |
4. Counsels
| Counsel Name | Organization |
|---|---|
| Christopher Anand Daniel | Advocatus Law LLP |
| Ganga Avadiar | Advocatus Law LLP |
| Harjean Kaur | Advocatus Law LLP |
| Simon Yuen | Legal Clinic LLC |
4. Facts
- Plaintiffs are professional golfers and members of the Asian Tour.
- Asian Tour imposed fines on plaintiffs for participating in tournaments organized by OneAsia.
- Regulation 1.10 of the Asian Tour's regulations restricted members from playing in competing or conflicting events without permission.
- Plaintiffs challenged Regulation 1.10 as an unreasonable restraint of trade.
- Asian Tour argued the regulation was necessary to protect the tour and its members' livelihoods.
- OneAsia was identified as a competitor that had 'poached' tournaments from the Asian Tour.
- The Asian Tour is owned and controlled by Asian Tour Ltd (ATL).
5. Formal Citations
- Pilkadaris Terry and others v Asian Tour (Tournament Players Division) Pte Ltd and another and another suit, Suit No 624 of 2010 and Suit 551 of 2010, [2012] SGHC 236
6. Timeline
| Date | Event |
|---|---|
| Asian Tour (Tournament Players Division) Pte Ltd incorporated | |
| Asian Tour Ltd incorporated | |
| Players’ meeting held in Tianjin, China | |
| Inaugural AGM of Asian Tour Ltd held | |
| Circular issued to Asian Tour members regarding release policy for OneAsia events | |
| Luxehills Chengdu Open held | |
| Plaintiffs issued letters for breaching Regulation 1.10 by participating in the Chengdu Open | |
| 29 GS Maekyung Open Golf Championship held | |
| Plaintiffs issued letters for breaching Regulation 1.10 for competing in the Maekyung Open | |
| SK Telecom Open held | |
| Plaintiffs informed they breached Regulation 1.10 for competing in the SK Telecom Open | |
| Indonesian Open presented by Enjoy Jakarta held | |
| Plaintiffs informed they breached Regulation 1.10 for competing in the Indonesian Open | |
| Appeals heard regarding penalties | |
| Suit 551 commenced and injunction applied for | |
| Injunction application heard before Choo Han Teck J | |
| Appeals heard by the board of directors of Asian Tour Ltd | |
| Suit 624 commenced | |
| Summonses dismissed | |
| Suit 624 consolidated with Suit 551 | |
| Judgment reserved |
7. Legal Issues
- Restraint of Trade
- Outcome: The court held that Regulation 1.10 was an unreasonable restraint of trade and therefore void.
- Category: Substantive
- Sub-Issues:
- Reasonableness of restraint
- Protection of legitimate proprietary interest
- Public interest
- Related Cases:
- [2008] 1 SLR(R) 663
- (1869) LR 9 Eq 345
- [1894] AC 535
- [1919] AC 548
- [1986] FCA 357
- [1971] HCA 71
- [1963] 1 Ch 413
- [2000] 1 SLR(R) 74
8. Remedies Sought
- Declaration that Regulation 1.10 is unenforceable
- Permanent injunction restraining the defendants from preventing the plaintiffs from participating in golf tournaments
- Damages
9. Cause of Actions
- Breach of Contract
- Restraint of Trade
10. Practice Areas
- Commercial Litigation
11. Industries
- Sports
- Entertainment
12. Cited Cases
| Case Name | Court | Affirmed | Citation | Jurisdiction | Significance |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Man Financial (S) Pte Ltd (formerly known as E D & F Man International (S) Pte Ltd v Wong Bark Chuan David | Court of Appeal | Yes | [2008] 1 SLR(R) 663 | Singapore | Cited for the principle that the doctrine of restraint of trade seeks to vindicate the legal right to freedom of trade while balancing the doctrine of freedom of contract. |
| Leather Cloth Company v Lorsont | N/A | Yes | (1869) LR 9 Eq 345 | N/A | Cited for the principle that every person should be at liberty to work for himself or herself. |
| Thorsten Nordenfelt (pauper) v The Maxim Nordernfelt Guns and Ammunition Company, Limited | N/A | Yes | [1894] AC 535 | N/A | Cited for the principle that it is against public policy to allow interference with individual liberty in trading and carrying on a business or occupation and for establishing that restraints of trade may be justified by the special circumstances of a particular case. |
| McEllistrim v Ballymacelligott Co-operative Agricultural and Dairy Society Ltd | N/A | Yes | [1919] AC 548 | N/A | Cited for the application of the doctrine of restraint of trade to a society of milk-producers which changed its rules to prevent any member from selling milk to anyone except the society. |
| Hughes v Western Australia Cricket Association (Inc) & Ors | Federal Court of Australia | Yes | [1986] FCA 357 | Australia | Cited for the principle that the doctrine of restraint of trade may operate in the case of sportspersons who derive income from the sport they played. |
| Buckley v Tutty | High Court of Australia | Yes | [1971] HCA 71 | Australia | Cited as an example of a case where rules preventing professional players from finding alternative employment were found to be in restraint of trade. |
| Eastham v Newcastle United Football Club | N/A | Yes | [1963] 1 Ch 413 | England | Cited as an example of a case where retain and transfer provisions that applied to a professional football player operated in restraint of trade. |
| National Aerated Water Co Pte Ltd v Monarch Co, Inc | N/A | Yes | [2000] 1 SLR(R) 74 | Singapore | Cited for the principle that reasonableness is not judged by whether the parties have freely entered into the restraint because the rule against unreasonable restraint is based on public policy and may not be excluded by mutual consent. |
13. Applicable Rules
| Rule Name |
|---|
| No applicable rules |
14. Applicable Statutes
| Statute Name | Jurisdiction |
|---|---|
| No applicable statutes | |
15. Key Terms and Keywords
15.1 Key Terms
- Restraint of trade
- Conflicting event
- Competing event
- Release policy
- Asian Tour
- OneAsia
- Tournament Players Committee
- Membership
- Professional golfers
- Independent contractors
15.2 Keywords
- Asian Tour
- Restraint of Trade
- Golf
- OneAsia
- Professional Golfers
- Singapore
- Tournament
- Regulation 1.10
16. Subjects
- Restraint of Trade
- Sports Law
- Contract Law
- Golf Tournaments
17. Areas of Law
- Restraint of Trade
- Contract Law
- Sports Law