The control on restraint of trade (ROT) clauses is designed to protect employees from vindictive employers, and courts tend to keep that in mind when hearing disputes. The question of upholding the ROT clauses in favour of the employee or employer by the courts would largely depend on the facts presented in the each case and the determination of the reasonability of ROT that would be covered in this paper. The extent to which restraint of trade clauses are legally allowed varies per jurisdiction
is to look at restraints of trade clauses in regards to contracts of employment, and in contracts for sales of a business, which may be used to restrict competition, therefore contradicting the individual liberty of action in trading. From case law it can be shown there is a sharp contrast between the individual liberty and the public policy. The law has been seen to protect competition for a very long time. Common law states and demands that the restraints that have been put on trade must be reasonable
occurs in our daily life; such as contract in employment. There is a specific situation arise from the contract which called restraints of trade and it is a clause in a contract which has the fundamental purpose to restrict a party’s business activities, profession or employment. However, the courts have never accepted and supported this provision because the restraints of trade are treated as interfering with or prohibiting a party undertaking their work and narrowing down the business competition
Table of Contents Introduction 1 Contracts in Restraint of Trade 1 Case 1: Wrigglesworth v. Wilson Anthony 4 Case 2: Svenson Hair Center Sdn Bhd v. Irene Chin Zee Ling 6 Case 3: Shanghai Hall Ltd v. Town House Hotel Ltd 8 Case 4: Polygram Records Sdn Bhd v. Hillary Ang & Ors & Anor 10 Case 5: Pertama Cabaret Nite Club Sdn. Bhd. v. Roman Tam 12 Case 6: Nagadevan Mahalingam v. Millennium Medicare Services 14 Case 7: Thomas Cowan & Co Ltd v. Orme 16 Case 8: Schmidt Scientific Sdn
contract; non-compliance with Clause 2 of the contract and fraudulent or falsified financial statements by Mr Walter. In the start of our argument it is important to highlight that Mr Casper prior to signing the contract assured Mr Walter, who had thought of not signing the contract if his store would be affected, that when it comes to his Westbrook Liquor Store the restraint of trade clause 2 will be ignored hence Mr Walter continued to sign the contract with clause 2 still limiting business of
non-compliance with Clause 2 of the contract and 2) fraudulent or falsified financial statements by Mr Walter. Law: Section 4 of Restraint of Trade Act 1976 (NSW), Section 47 of the Trade Practices Act of 1974. Application: In the start of our argument it is important to highlight that Mr Casper prior to signing the contract assured Mr Walter, who had thought of not signing the contract if his store would be affected, that when it comes to his Westbrook Liquor Store the restraint of trade clause 2 will be
Memorandum To: Diane Westwood. From: 8701100. Re: Napier Proteins Ltd – Enforceability of Restraint of Trade Provision. Date: 1st May 2017. Napier Proteins Ltd, our client, wants to stop the operation of Wanganui Byproducts Ltd. You have asked me to review a restraint of trade provision in John’s employment agreement with Napier Proteins Ltd (Proteins) and the ability to enforce it against Wanganui Byproducts Ltd (Byproducts). The issues relating to the use of confidential information will
Section 7.3: “Casual and part time employees, or employees who work less than a full year, shall receive 6% holiday pay over and above the ordinary hourly rate in lieu of annual holidays.” Section 7.4: “Employees who work on a Statutory Public Holiday shall be paid the overtime rate of time and a quarter and will also receive a day off in lieu.” Both of these rates of pay are less than the legally required minimum as stated under the Holidays Act 2003. • S23: Calculation of annual holiday pay if
Intellectual property is often misunderstood in the employment relationship. The protection of intellectual property and confidential information is essential and valuable in for both employees and employers. Employees may misuse confidential information during their employment or once their engagement comes to an end. It is vital that employers take all necessary measures to prevent intellectual property infringement. Disputes over ownership of intellectual property are likely to arise between employees
QUESTION 1 Mpho and Thabo need a business vehicle denoted as a juristic person which is in form of a business entity. The most favourable business vehicle for Mpho and Thabo would be a company, a private company in particular. A private company is a separate legal entity and has a separate life form from its owners and is required by the Companies Act of 2008, no. 71 to perform rights and duties of its own. A private company can be difficult and costly to establish and is subjected to a lot of