| Restrictions | OK |
|---|---|
| Jurisdiction | Employment Relations Authority - Auckland |
| Reference No | AA 113/05 |
| Hearing date | 30 Mar 2005 |
| Determination date | 31 March 2005 |
| Member | Y S Oldfield |
| Representation | B Spong ; S Mitchell |
| Location | Auckland |
| Parties | Ingersoll-Rand Architectural Hardware Ltd v Nicholson |
| Summary | RESTRAINT OF TRADE – Principal competitor of applicant had approached respondent with job offer – Restraint of trade clause – Whether clause related to employment with competitor or just principal/agent/director/shareholder relationship – Clause did not prevent employment – Whether proprietary interest to be protected – Applicant did not have proprietary interest in general level of skill respondent had built up over course of career or in good general relationships he currently had within industry – Where applicant did have proprietary interest was adequately protected by second clause (restraining soliciting business from or approaching persons/company who were customers of company during 12 months preceding termination) and undertakings by respondent – No proprietary interest to be protected by restraint clause - Whether restraint reasonable – Conceded that length reasonable – Would be considerable hardship and worry to respondent and family if prevented from starting new job – No real risk of loss over next two months – Restraint not reasonable – Unenforceable – Remedies sought by applicant declined - Sales consultant |
| Result | Application dismissed ; Costs reserved |
| Cases Cited | DB Breweries v Marshall [1994] 1 ERNZ 89 |
| Number of Pages | 6 |
| PDF File Link: | aa 113_05.pdf [pdf 33 KB] |