Reply to thread

Message: [QUOTE="john1420, post: 3216654, member: 2077"] Well, I just did some very interesting reading on non-compete clauses, here's a few highlights...... "A restraint clause can’t be accepted on face value because the courts will uphold it only if it is ‘reasonable’. For example, a court won’t enforce a clause that unfairly interferes with a worker’s right to contribute their own labour. As stated by the High Court of Australia in Buckley v Tutty (1971) 125 CLR 353 at 380: “Unreasonable restraints are unenforceable as it is contrary to public welfare that a person should be unreasonably prevented from earning a living in whichever lawful way he chooses and that the public should be unlawfully deprived of his services.” Post-employment restraints are presumed to be invalid and unenforceable unless it can be shown that they are genuinely necessary to protect commercial interests. The onus is on the employer to demonstrate that a clause imposes no greater restraint than is reasonably necessary to protect these interests. Employers can’t use a restraint clause to protect themselves against the usual processes of competition in a sector or market. Generally, broad restrictions on competition won’t be deemed to be reasonable or enforceable. Legitimate interests that are commonly recognised as supporting a valid restraint include the employer’s confidential information or trade secrets, customers and clients of the business (business goodwill) and the employer’s staff." [URL]https://www.seek.com.au/employer/hiring-advice/restraints-trade-non-compete-clauses-reasonable[/URL] "Simply because an employment contract contains a restraint provision, does not necessarily mean it is enforceable and it may be void. The law in New South Wales is as stated in the case of [I]Write v Gasweld[/I] (1991) 22 NSWLR 317: [I]An employer is not entitled to protect himself [/I][or herself][I] against mere competition by a former employee, and the corollary of that is that the employee is entitled to use skills, experience and know-how acquired in the service of the former employer in legitimate competition…[/I] However, the Courts will enforce a restraint if it is to protect the legitimate business interests of the employer, as long as those interests are important enough and the restraint goes only as far as necessary." [URL]https://www.fglaw.com.au/non-compete-employment/[/URL] "A non-compete clause operates to restrict one party from undertaking competitive activities, which may also include employment. Trying to enforce an unreasonable non-compete clause is against the public policy of a market economy. Doing so may restrict a party from participating in the economy. A provision may be unreasonable if it prevents a party from offering their skills or undertaking further business activities. A court can sever certain sections of a clause if it considers the clause (or parts of the clause) to be unreasonable." [URL]https://legalvision.com.au/how-does-a-non-compete-clause-work/[/URL] [/QUOTE]

Verification

Active Now

No members online now.

Total: 5 (members: 0, guests: 5)

Reply to thread

Log in

Active Now