Updated to include information on Tillman v Egon Zehnder Ltd, in which the Supreme Court considered if an unenforceable part of a post-termination restriction clause could be severed.
Updated to reflect that the Supreme Court allowed the appeal in Tillman v Egon Zehnder Ltd.
In Tillman v Egon Zehnder Ltd, the Supreme Court allowed the appeal and held that a six-month non-compete clause was enforceable because the unenforceable part of the clause was capable of being severed.
The Government consults on proposals to limit the misuse of confidentiality clauses in situations of workplace harassment or discrimination.
Businesses, particularly in the finance, technology, pharma, IT and manufacturing sectors use non-compete provisions to protect against potentially unfair competition by their employees. But one case being considered in the Supreme Court, could force their approach to change, writes lawyer Michael McCartney.
Employers are being warned about the wording of restrictive covenants in employment contracts as a landmark case is heard this week at the Supreme Court.
Which employment cases will have the biggest impact on HR in 2019? We assess the likely impact on employers of upcoming cases on: the national minimum wage, shared parental leave, holiday pay, restrictive covenants, collective bargaining, covert CCTV, and employment status.
In Tillman v Egon Zehnder, the Court of Appeal held that a six-month non-compete clause that prevented the employee from being "concerned or interested in any business carried on in competition" after termination of employment was unenforceable as it would bar her from being a shareholder in a competing business.
The High Court has held that two ex-employees breached their contracts of employment by misusing confidential information belonging to their former employer's business. However, the High Court found that the employer had not suffered any financial loss and that it was entitled to only nominal damages of £1 from each employee.
HR and legal information and guidance relating to restrictive covenants.