| Restrictions | OK |
|---|---|
| Jurisdiction | Employment Relations Authority - Christchurch |
| Reference No | CA 216/10 |
| Hearing date | 24 Nov 2010 |
| Determination date | 25 November 2010 |
| Member | J Crichton |
| Representation | L Brook ; A Shaw |
| Location | Christchurch |
| Parties | Blincoe v PGG Wrightson Ltd |
| Summary | INTERIM INJUNCTION – RESTRAINT OF TRADE – Applicant sought interim order to commence work at CRT Ltd pending determination of dispute with respondent over restraint of trade provision in employment agreement (“EA”) – Claimed restraint provision unlawful and unenforceable – Also claimed relied on respondents waiver of restraint – Respondent argued restraint lawful, enforceable, and only conditional waiver – Respondent notified applicant that position being disestablished, however, made clear applicant would have been appointed to one of new restructured positions – Applicant notified respondent would not apply for new positions and would resign – Applicant claimed manager stated definitively restraint provision would not be enforced by respondent – Subsequently applicant signed EA with CRT Ltd who was competitor of respondent – Applicant told by respondent restraint of trade provision would be enforced – Respondent argued waiver of restraint conditional as based on what applicant said would be doing when finished up – Authority found respondent gave applicant some basis for understanding restraint provision would not be imposed – Found any qualification respondent put on applicant’s remarks about restraint would be nullity because applicant had no information at time – Found applicant entered into arrangement on explicit understanding respondent would not enforce restraint – Found onus on respondent to make clear basis of restraint policy – Found applicant able to rely on intelligence received that restraint provision would be waived – Found applicant had arguable case – Found restraint provision went beyond what was reasonable – Found arguable case restraint provision illegal as too wide and therefore unenforceable – Found damages not appropriate alternative remedy – Found balance of convenience favoured applicant by slim margin – Found overall justice supported granting of interim relief – Interim order granted allowing applicant to commence work with CRT Ltd – Orders accordingly - Livestock representative |
| Result | Application granted ; Costs reserved |
| Main Category | Injunction |
| Statutes | Illegal Contracts Act 1970 s8 |
| Cases Cited | Clarke v Attorney-General [1997] ERNZ 600 |
| Number of Pages | 13 |
| PDF File Link: | ca 216_10.pdf [pdf 41 KB] |