High Court adds words into non-compete covenant
By Alex Newborough
Employers can seek to protect their businesses from ex-employees through the use of restrictive covenants. Careful drafting is usually required for such covenants to be enforceable, although this case (Prophet plc v Huggett) provides the exception to the rule.
To be enforceable, restrictive covenants must (at the time at which they are entered into) go no further than is reasonably necessary to protect the legitimate business interests of the employer in the particular circumstances. Therefore, restrictive covenants will usually include appropriate limitations in terms of time, scope and geographical reach.
In particular, employers face difficulties in justifying non-compete covenants that prevent employees working for competitors unless these are designed to protect trade secrets or confidential information and such protection cannot be adequately achieved by less far-reaching restrictions such as non-dealing and/or non-solicitation covenants…
Click on the link below to read the rest of the Shoosmiths briefing.
News from Shoosmiths
News from The Lawyer
Briefings from Shoosmiths
Rachel Moore looks at how to apply the Consumer Contracts (Information, Cancellation and Additional Charges) Regulations to contracts concluded through an aggregator.
Two recent cases illustrate the importance of employers making reasonable adjustments for disabled employees placed at risk of redundancy.
Analysis from The Lawyer
Compliance and corporate governance codes for large financial institutions will undoubtedly include provisions to regulate high pay in the future
There’s more to the ABS model than attracting the man in the street and procuring external investment. Partners at the big corporate firms, take note…