MoneySmart Singapore v Artem Musienko: Enforceability of Restraint of Trade Clauses & Interlocutory Injunctions
In MoneySmart Singapore Pte Ltd v Artem Musienko, the High Court of Singapore addressed the enforceability of restraint of trade and confidentiality clauses in an employment agreement. MoneySmart sought interim injunctions to prevent Musienko, a former employee, from working for a rival company, CAG Regional Singapore Pte Ltd. The court discharged the interim injunctions, finding that the non-compete clause was unenforceable for failing to protect a legitimate proprietary interest and being unreasonable in scope, and that there was no good arguable case that Musienko had breached the confidentiality clause.
1. Case Overview
1.1 Court
General Division of the High Court1.2 Outcome
Both interim injunctions that were granted on an ex parte basis are discharged.
1.3 Case Type
Civil
1.4 Judgment Type
Judgment
1.5 Jurisdiction
Singapore
1.6 Description
Singapore High Court case concerning the enforceability of restraint of trade clauses and interlocutory injunctions in an employment contract.
1.7 Decision Date
2. Parties and Outcomes
| Party Name | Role | Type | Outcome | Outcome Type | Counsels |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| MoneySmart Singapore Pte Ltd | Claimant | Corporation | Interim injunctions discharged | Lost | Lee Ping, Swah Yeqin Shirin, Yong Ying Jie |
| Artem Musienko | Defendant | Individual | Interim injunctions set aside | Won | Lee Eng Beng, Timothy Ang Wei Kiat, Liu Yulin |
3. Judges
| Judge Name | Title | Delivered Judgment |
|---|---|---|
| Tan Siong Thye | Senior Judge | Yes |
4. Counsels
| Counsel Name | Organization |
|---|---|
| Lee Ping | Shook Lin & Bok LLP |
| Swah Yeqin Shirin | Shook Lin & Bok LLP |
| Yong Ying Jie | Shook Lin & Bok LLP |
| Lee Eng Beng | Rajah & Tann Singapore LLP |
| Timothy Ang Wei Kiat | Rajah & Tann Singapore LLP |
| Liu Yulin | Rajah & Tann Singapore LLP |
4. Facts
- Artem Musienko was employed by MoneySmart Singapore Pte Ltd as Head of Technology at MoneySmart’s Bubblegum division from July 2022 to January 2024.
- Musienko's employment agreement contained non-compete and confidentiality clauses.
- Musienko resigned from MoneySmart and joined CAG Regional Singapore Pte Ltd, a subsidiary of MoneyHero Limited, a rival firm of MoneySmart.
- MoneySmart sought interim injunctions to prevent Musienko from working for CAGRS, alleging breach of the non-compete and confidentiality clauses.
- The non-compete clause prohibited Musienko from engaging with any business providing online financial product comparison services in Southeast Asia.
- The confidentiality clause prohibited Musienko from using or disclosing confidential information about MoneySmart.
- Musienko was placed on paid garden leave for 12 months.
5. Formal Citations
- MoneySmart Singapore Pte Ltd v Artem Musienko, Originating Claim No 49 of 2024 (Summonses Nos 229 and 360 of 2024), [2024] SGHC 94
6. Timeline
| Date | Event |
|---|---|
| Defendant entered into an employment agreement with the claimant. | |
| Defendant commenced employment with the claimant. | |
| Defendant resigned from the claimant. | |
| Claimant accepted defendant's resignation. | |
| Defendant's last day of service with the claimant. | |
| Defendant commenced employment with CAGRS. | |
| Claimant filed HC/OC 49/2024. | |
| Claimant filed an ex parte application vide SUM 229. | |
| Court granted interim injunctions on an ex parte basis. | |
| Defendant filed SUM 360 to set aside the interim injunctions. | |
| Judgment reserved. |
7. Legal Issues
- Enforceability of Restraint of Trade Clauses
- Outcome: The court held that the non-compete clause was unenforceable as it did not protect a legitimate proprietary interest and was unreasonable in scope.
- Category: Substantive
- Sub-Issues:
- Reasonableness of scope of activity
- Reasonableness of geographical scope
- Reasonableness of temporal scope
- Protection of legitimate proprietary interest
- Doctrine of severance
- Related Cases:
- [2008] 1 SLR(R) 663
- Breach of Confidentiality Clause
- Outcome: The court found that there was no good arguable case that the defendant had breached or was likely to breach the confidentiality clause.
- Category: Substantive
- Interim Injunctions
- Outcome: The court discharged the interim injunctions.
- Category: Procedural
- Sub-Issues:
- Balance of convenience
- Full and frank disclosure
- Related Cases:
- [1975] AC 396
- [2017] 2 SLR 997
8. Remedies Sought
- Injunction to restrain breach of Non-Compete Clause
- Injunction to restrain breach of Confidentiality Clause
- Damages for breach of Non-Compete Clause
- Damages for breach of Confidentiality Clause
9. Cause of Actions
- Breach of Contract
- Breach of Non-Compete Clause
- Breach of Confidentiality Clause
10. Practice Areas
- Commercial Litigation
- Employment Law
- Contract Law
11. Industries
- Financial Services
- Technology
- Insurance
12. Cited Cases
| Case Name | Court | Affirmed | Citation | Jurisdiction | Significance |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| American Cyanamid Co v Ethicon Ltd | N/A | Yes | [1975] AC 396 | N/A | Cited for the test concerning the grant of an interlocutory injunction. |
| RGA Holdings International Inc v Loh Choon Phing Robin and another | Court of Appeal | Yes | [2017] 2 SLR 997 | Singapore | Cited for the principle that the American Cyanamid principles do not apply in a situation where the defendant is about to breach or has already breached a negative covenant in a contract. |
| Oro Negro Drilling Pte Ltd and others v Integradora de Servicios Petroleros Oro Negro SAPI de CV and others and another appeal (Jesus Angel Guerra Mendez, non-party) | Court of Appeal | Yes | [2020] 1 SLR 226 | Singapore | Applied the approach in RGA Holdings and found that since there was a good arguable case that the negative covenant there had been breached, the interim injunctions should have been maintained to restrain any continuing breach of that negative covenant. |
| Shopee Singapore Pte Ltd v Lim Teck Yong | High Court | Yes | [2024] SGHC 29 | Singapore | Clarified that the approach in RGA Holdings applies to restraint of trade cases as well. |
| 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 | Identified a two-step test for determining whether a restraint of trade clause is enforceable. |
| Stratech Systems Ltd v Nyam Chiu Shin (alias Yan Qiuxin) and others | N/A | Yes | [2005] 2 SLR(R) 479 | Singapore | Cited for the principle that where the protection of confidential information or trade secrets is already addressed by another contractual clause, the covenantee will have to demonstrate that the restraint of trade clause in question covers a legitimate proprietary interest over and above the protection of confidential information or trade secrets. |
| National Aerated Water Co Pte Ltd v Monarch Co, Inc | N/A | Yes | [2000] 1 SLR(R) 74 | Singapore | Cited for the doctrine of severance. |
| HT SRL v Wee Shuo Woon | N/A | Yes | [2019] 5 SLR 245 | Singapore | Applied the principle in Man Financial that where the protection of confidential information or trade secrets is already covered by another clause in the contract, the covenantee will have to demonstrate that the restraint of trade clause in question covers a legitimate proprietary interest over and above the protection of confidential information or trade secrets. |
| PH Hydraulics & Engineering Pte Ltd v Intrepid Offshore Construction Pte Ltd and another | N/A | Yes | [2012] 4 SLR 36 | Singapore | Cited for the principle that an employer can have a legitimate proprietary interest in maintaining a stable, trained workforce. |
| Powerdrive Pte Ltd v Loh Kin Yong Philip and others | N/A | Yes | [2019] 3 SLR 399 | Singapore | Cited for the principle that a clause which prohibited an employee from working for a rival company regardless of the scope of the employee’s work with his new employer was too wide and therefore not reasonable. |
| Buckman Laboratories (Asia) Pte Ltd v Lee Wei Hoong | N/A | Yes | [1999] 1 SLR(R) 205 | Singapore | Cited for the principle that there must be a close connection between the geographical scope of the restriction and the work done by the employee prior to leaving. |
| Lek Gwee Noi v Humming Flowers & Gifts Pte Ltd | N/A | Yes | [2014] 3 SLR 27 | Singapore | Cited for the principle that a clause containing cascading covenants leaves the vulnerable employee uncertain as to which cascading restriction binds him in law until the issue is actually determined by a court. |
| Bahtera Offshore (M) Sdn Bhd v Sim Kok Beng and another | N/A | Yes | [2009] 4 SLR(R) 365 | Singapore | Cited for the principles governing full and frank disclosure in ex parte applications. |
| Jardine Lloyd Thompson Pte Ltd v Howden Insurance Brokers (S) Pte Ltd and others | N/A | Yes | [2015] 5 SLR 258 | Singapore | Cited for the principle that there was a serious question to be tried insofar as it could not be said that the claim there was frivolous or vexatious, even though the court had concurrently found that there did not seem to be sufficient evidence to suggest that there had been any misuse of confidential information or serious breaches of confidentiality, potential or otherwise. |
| Re Fineplas Holdings Pte Ltd (formerly known as Tasinder Pte Ltd) | N/A | Yes | [2001] 1 SLR(R) 192 | Singapore | Cited for the principle that if damages would be an adequate remedy and the respondent is in a financial position to pay them, an injunction should normally not be granted. |
| Leong Quee Ching Karen v Lim Soon Huat and others | High Court | Yes | [2023] SGHC 359 | Singapore | Cited for the principle that if damages would not be an adequate remedy, or if the court is doubtful about the adequacy of damages, the court considers where the balance of convenience lies. |
| Maldives Airports Co Ltd and another v GMR Malé International Airport Pte Ltd | N/A | Yes | [2013] 2 SLR 449 | Singapore | Cited for the principle that the court should take whichever course appears to carry the lower risk of injustice if that course should ultimately turn out to have been the “wrong” course. |
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
- Non-Compete Clause
- Confidentiality Clause
- Interim Injunction
- Legitimate Proprietary Interest
- Balance of Convenience
- Full and Frank Disclosure
- Online Financial Product Comparison Services
- Digital Insurance
- Garden Leave
15.2 Keywords
- restraint of trade
- non-compete
- confidentiality
- injunction
- employment
- contract
- MoneySmart
- Musienko
16. Subjects
- Employment Law
- Contract Law
- Injunctions
- Restraint of Trade
17. Areas of Law
- Injunctions
- Interlocutory Injunction
- Employment Law
- Contract of Service
- Restrictive Covenants
- Contract
- Illegality and Public Policy
- Restraint of Trade