Reply to thread

Message: [QUOTE="lynx000, post: 3178293, member: 2065"] It depends on what the clause says. The usual scenario with a non-compete clause is that it operates after the employment relationship or contract ends. It is usually for a fixed (and mostly limited) period of time and to a particular geographic area or industry. If it is too long or too extensive in terms of its area of operation they usually get struck down. That is why I said I would be surprised if it operated in the manner suggested by Tripps and why I was interested in seeing how the clause had been drafted. In any event, re his threat of suing us, the breach of contract would be by Donaghy and not us. So Storm's primary cause of action would be against him seeking damages and most likely an injunction (that would really aid relations with your CEO). At best against us, there is an old tort called inducing a breach of contract. But if Donaghy is able to negotiate and leave after 31 January, their cause of action is pretty much illusory in terms of what they could get from us in damages. Maybe they would seek an injunction to restrain us from talking to him. In other words, I think he is pissing in the wind. [/QUOTE]

No members online now.

Total: 134 (members: 0, guests: 134)