| Featured Legal Services |
|---|
| Latest Library Content |
|---|
| Contract Drafting Tips Series: Restraint of Trade Clause | | Print | |
| Written by Noric Dilanchian | ||
| Thursday, 13 March 2008 | ||
|
A restraint of trade clause seeks to restrict the freedom of a person to trade or deal in specified ways with assets, information or third parties. It can apply during a contractual relationship and also for a period after its termination or expiry.
This article is part of our series on drafting tips for contract clauses.
The law is that a restraint of trade is contrary to public policy and unenforceable unless the restraint is reasonable in the parties' interests and also in the public interest: Attwood v Lamont (1920) 3 KB 371.
The typical situation we see is when a company, employer or employee calls us in a panic for advice on a restraint. It's best to check restraints earlier than this.
If a verbal or written restraint is unreasonable then it is unenforceable. Its validity should be assessed at the time it is imposed. For written agreements that's usually when it is signed. This is the honeymoon period, usually the panic attack arises years later when the relationship has ended or is breaking down.
The legal onus of proof
is on the party seeking to enforce the restraint to prove that the restraint is
reasonable: Lindner v Murdock's Garage (1950) 83 CLR 628 at 646. The onus is on the party
challenging the restraint to prove that it is against the public interest.
The law of restraint of trade can be used effectively for only protectable interests.
Legislation
Restraint of Trade Act 1976 (NSW). This act seeks to overcome difficulties in the common law. Contracts Review Act 1980 (NSW).
Cases
Drafting Tips
Sample Clause32.1 For a period of one year after the termination of his engagement as a salesman, the salesman will not operate as an Agent or Sub-Agent within one mile of any main office or branch office conducted by the Agent at such date of termination.
This clause was the subject of debate in Phillip M Levy Pty Ltd v Christopoulos (1973) VR 673. A real estate agent, after leaving the plaintiff's real estate agency, obtained employment within one mile. The plaintiff filed for an injunction. Whilst the court recognised the plaintiff was entitled to protect its business, it could not establish evidence that it had goodwill within the one mile radius. The court did not enforce the above clause.
The takeaway lesson is - a restraint of trade clause must involve a clear and reasonable protectable interest.
--------------------------------------------------------------------- Further reading: |
||
|
Want free initial legal advice?
Call Noric Dilanchian on (+612) 9269 0229 for a free initial conversation on whether a restraint you use or face is likely to be void, read down or unenforceable. We have a questionnaire tool which helps efficiently draft legally effective restraints of trade.
After hours send an email or better still an Enquiry Form. We'll reply with a costed proposal.
FAQ | What we do | Testimonials
Subscribe: Cue newsletter (free) | RSS feed Search: Overall site search | Library-specific search | Library downloads page Author & Firm: Author profile | Contact author | Firm Differentiation | Firm Brochure [PDF] |
| Next > |
|---|
| Main Menu | |||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
| Free Tools |
|---|
| Registered Users | |
|---|---|
|

