In this decision of ATT Systems (S’pore) Pte Ltd and another v Centricore (S) Pte Ltd and others [2025] SGHC 13, the Singapore High Court held, among other things, that the general non-compete obligations were valid and enforceable against the former employees. The Court found that the defendants had breached confidentiality obligations, non-compete and loyalty obligations, induced breaches of contract by the former employees, and engaged in a conspiracy to cause damage by such means.
Case: Singapore High Court on what constitutes confidential information protectable post-employment
Significance
In Asia Petworld Pte Ltd v Sivabalan s/o Ramasami [2022] SGHC 128, the General Division of the Singapore High Court (Philip Jeyaretnam J) analysed certain categories of information to determine if they were subject to implied general confidentiality obligations post-employment. The Court affirmed a key principle that the knowledge and experience that an employee acquires during his employment is not protectable confidential information post-employment.
Can employment contract prohibit post-termination disclosure of information that is not confidential?
Can an employment contract clause expressly prohibit post-termination disclosure of information that is not actually confidential? Most likely, no.
As a Singapore employment lawyer, I recently came across such a clause in an employment contract prohibiting indefinite disclosure of “any information” relating to the employer company.
Case Update: Singapore High Court holds no general implied duty of confidentiality between lender and borrower
International Financial Services (S) Pte Ltd v Old Mutual International Isle of Man Ltd Singapore Branch [2018] SGHC 127
Significance: the Singapore High Court held at [27] that there is no implied general duty of confidentiality between a lender and borrower.
Case Update: Centre for Laser and Aesthetic Medicine Pte Ltd v Goh Pui Kiat [2017] SGHC 72 – Successful Claim for Breach of Confidentiality and Conspiracy to Injure by Unlawful Means
Significance: Singapore High Court held that former director, a aesthetic doctor, breached obligations of confidentiality and conspired with intent to injure the former company (a medical clinic) by unlawful means. The Court held that the damages payable would be the loss computed based on the profits to the new company/clinic made from the diversion of patients and expedited by the use of the confidential information. The Court made a fair and reasonable estimate that the diversion of patients would have taken place within 6 months without the use of the confidential information, and so computed the loss based on such timeline.
Case Update: Wee Shuo Woon v HT S.R. L. [2017] SGCA 23 – Court of Appeal holds confidential and privileged information does not lose confidentiality and privilege from being released on the Internet from hacking
Wee Shuo Woon v HT S.R. L. [2017] SGCA 23
Significance: The Court of Appeal holds that confidential and privileged information does not lose its confidential nature through being released on the Internet from hacking.
Case Update: HT S.R.L. v Wee Shuo Woon [2016] SGHC 15 – clarifying confidentiality, privilege & admissibility
HT S.R.L. v Wee Shuo Woon [2016] SGHC 15
Significance: Singapore High Court holds that privileged & confidential emails obtained by a hacker and leaked onto WikiLeaks retain the protection of privilege & confidentiality. Court ordered for emails to be expunged from the defendant’s affidavits.