Cyprus District Court Grants Interim IP Injunctions and appoints an IT expert

By Dr Pavlos Neofytou Kourtellos – 10 October 2025

The Limassol District Court has issued a significant interim ruling addressing urgent intellectual property protection measures in the context of software development and proprietary code ownership dispute.

Background

A Limassol-based technology company, initiated proceedings against a Cypriot company and many associated individuals, alleging misappropriation and unlawful exploitation of its proprietary source code, confidential business data, and trade secrets.

The plaintiff claims extensive damages, including general, punitive, and exemplary damages, as well as loss of profits or unjust enrichment, and sought a series of injunctive remedies to prevent further misuse of its intellectual property.

Legal Framework

The application, filed under Part 7 of the new Civil Procedure Rules (effective 1.9.2023), was grounded primarily on:

1. Article 32 of the Courts of Justice Law (N.14/60)

2. Copyright and Related Rights Law (N.59/1976, Articles 13A–13B)
3. Equitable principles and the Court’s inherent jurisdiction

The plaintiff proceeded ex parte (unilaterally) seeking immediate restraining and disclosure orders.

The Court’s Ruling

After examining the affidavit evidence including expert’s forensic analysis and written submissions of the plaintiff’s counsels (P. N. Kourtellos & Associates LLC, L. Protopapa & Co LLC, and Yiannakis K. Thoma Law Firm), the Court granted several key interim injunctions:

1. Prohibitory orders restraining all defendants from using or exploiting the Plaintiff’s source code, data, or trade secrets.

1. Mandatory disclosure orders against Defendants 1–3 requiring the production of documents and data related to the alleged misappropriation.

1. Ancillary prohibitions preventing any destruction or concealment of relevant materials.

1. A further injunction prohibiting changes to the corporate or shareholding structure of Defendant No. 1.

The Court found that, prima facie, the statutory and equitable requirements for interim relief were satisfied and emphasized the preventive and protective function of such measures to avoid irreparable harm to the applicant’s IP rights.

Reserved Issue – Interim Receiver

A request to appoint an interim receiver/manager of the first defendant was deferred. The Judge described this as an “exceptionally intrusive remedy” and decided that the defendants should first be heard, citing principles of natural justice and authorities such as Ambrosiadou v. Coward (2013) 1(A) A.A.D. 78 and In re Zhigachov (2013) 1 A.A.D. 1318.

Appointment of an IT Expert – Safeguards and further Directions

Moreover, the Court ordered the Plaintiff to engage an independent IT/forensic expert at its own expense to oversee the disclosure process, ensuring confidentiality and data protection.

Comment

These ruling underscores the Cypriot courts’ readiness to grant robust interim relief in intellectual property and digital assets related disputes, particularly where confidential information or source code is at risk. It also highlights the practical importance of the new procedural framework introduced in 2023, which facilitates swift, electronically-filed applications and structured interim protection for corporate litigants.