• Facebook
  • Twitter
  • LinkedIn
Call us now: 01243 836 840   [email protected]
Pure Employment Law
  • Who We Are
    • Nicola Brown
    • Peter Stevens
    • Elena Elsam
    • David Jones
    • Linda Nye
    • Brenda Cherry
  • For Employers
    • Advice on HR and People issues
    • Investigations, Hearings and Appeals
    • Restructuring and Redundancy
    • Defending Employment Tribunal Claims
    • Dismissal of Senior Executives
    • Contracts, Handbooks and Policies
    • Employment Law Training
  • For Employees
    • Settlement Agreements
    • Workplace Issues including Disciplinary and Grievance
    • Bringing an Employment Tribunal Claim
  • Employment Law Events
  • Legal Updates
  • Testimonials
  • Vacancies
  • Contact us
  • Search
  • Menu Menu

Post termination restrictions – more issues for the courts

30th October 2012/in News /by Nicola Brown

The question of whether or not restrictive covenants will be enforceable by the courts is always a difficult one to answer.  The starting point is that they are void for being in restraint of trade and contrary to public policy, unless the employer can show that it has a legitimate interest to protect and the protection sought is no more than is reasonable. October has seen the courts grapple with a couple of interesting cases in this area.

In the first case, FW Farnsworth Limited v Lacy (2012), the High Court had to address the question of whether the employee would be bound by restrictions contained in an unsigned version of a contract of employment.

In this case, Mr Lacy signed and returned a contract of employment sometime after he joined the company.  That contract contained restrictive covenants.  A few years later, in 2009, Mr Lacy was promoted, and sent a new contract which contained more onerous restrictive covenants, and which also allowed Mr Lacy to opt to receive certain benefits. Mr Lacy read the new contract and applied for two of the benefits now available to him (private medical insurance and a defined benefits pension scheme). He did not sign and return the contract, but neither did he raise any concerns about its terms.

When Mr Lacy subsequently left FW Farnsworth Limited’s employment and sought new employment in breach of the restrictive covenants contained in the 2009 contract, he argued that FW Farnsworth could not rely on the restrictive covenants in the 2009 contract as he had never signed it. The High Court did not agree. They held that Mr Lacy had impliedly accepted the terms of the 2009 contract, and that was evident from his application for private medical insurance and to join the defined benefits pension scheme. As such he was bound by the restrictive covenants in the 2009 contract.

In the second case, PAT Systems v Neilly (2012), the question was whether a restrictive covenant which was unenforceable when it was entered into became enforceable when the employee was promoted. Mr Neilly was employed as an account manager in 2000 and entered into a contract of employment containing restrictive covenants which were stated to prevent him working for a competitor for a period of 12 months following the end of his employment with PAT Systems. In 2005, Mr Neilly was promoted and signed a letter agreeing that, other than his pay and responsibilities, all other terms of his employment remained as before. In April 2012 Mr Neilly was dismissed when he said he was going to work for a competitor. PAT Systems then sought an injunction to enforce the restrictive covenants.

The High Court held that the restrictive covenants were unenforceable when they were entered into in 2000. Whilst PAT Systems acknowledged that the restrictions were unreasonable at that time, they argued that the reasonableness or otherwise of the restrictions should be judged not as at 2000, but when Mr Neilly signed the letter in 2005 acknowledging that the terms of his employment remained unchanged. The Court did not agree. They held that it was wrong for a restrictive covenant, which was void when entered into, to become revived by future conduct unless that was the clear unequivocal intention of the parties. That was not the position here.

These cases illustrate some of the difficulties which both employers and employees can have when faced with the question of the enforceability of restrictive covenants. This is one of the most complex areas of law, and to an extent is somewhat subjective as each case is, quite rightly, decided on its own particular facts.

We have considerable experience in drafting and enforcing restrictive covenants, so taking advice from us on the scope and enforceability of covenants before you need to rely on them is time well spent. Please contact any member of the Pure Employment Law team on 01243 836840 or [email protected].

Please note that this update is not intended to be exhaustive or be a substitute for legal advice. The application of the law in this area will often depend upon the specific facts and you are advised to seek specific advice on any given scenario.
Share this article
  • Share on Facebook
  • Share on Twitter
  • Share on WhatsApp
  • Share on LinkedIn
  • Share on Reddit
  • Share by Mail
https://www.pureemploymentlaw.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2019/02/Pure-Employment-Law-logo.jpg 0 0 Nicola Brown https://www.pureemploymentlaw.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2019/02/Pure-Employment-Law-logo.jpg Nicola Brown2012-10-30 11:55:512014-12-03 15:48:30Post termination restrictions – more issues for the courts

Join our mailing list

* = required field
Mailing Lists


Recent Legal Updates

  • FAQs about COT3s 18th December 2020
  • Can an employer withdraw a notice of redundancy? 18th December 2020
  • Will employers be able to insist that staff have the Covid-19 vaccination? 18th December 2020
  • Furlough over Christmas? 18th December 2020
  • Update – Furlough scheme extended 18th December 2020
Link to: Contact Us

Any questions? Why not get in touch!

Our advice is always given in plain English without any waffle, and we focus on providing practical solutions to our clients’ problems.

Contact us

LEGAL INFORMATION

Pure Employment Law | 1 Little London, Chichester, West Sussex, PO19 1PH
[email protected] | Tel: 01243 836840

Pure Employment Law is the trading name of Pure Employment Law Limited, registered in England and Wales with company number 07134294 and whose registered office is 1 Little London, Chichester, West Sussex, PO19 1PH. Pure Employment Law Limited is authorised and regulated by the Solicitors Regulation Authority with registration number 533794. A list of the company’s directors is available for inspection at the registered office

DISCLAIMER

The information contained in this website is for general information purposes only. The information is provided by Pure Employment Law and while we endeavour to keep the information up to date and correct, we make no representations or warranties of any kind, express or implied, about the completeness, accuracy, reliability, suitability or availability with respect to the website or the information, products, services, or related graphics contained on the website for any purpose. Any reliance you place on such information is therefore strictly at your own risk.

Privacy Policy | Cookies Policy | Terms & Conditions | How to make a complaint | Sitemap

© Pure Employment Law 2021

Scroll to top

This site uses cookies. By continuing to browse the site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies as defined in our cookie policy.

Accept Cookie Policy

Cookie and Privacy Settings



How we use cookies

We may request cookies to be set on your device. We use cookies to let us know when you visit our websites, how you interact with us, to enrich your user experience, and to customize your relationship with our website.

Click on the different category headings to find out more. You can also change some of your preferences. Note that blocking some types of cookies may impact your experience on our websites and the services we are able to offer.

Essential Website Cookies

These cookies are strictly necessary to provide you with services available through our website and to use some of its features.

Because these cookies are strictly necessary to deliver the website, refuseing them will have impact how our site functions. You always can block or delete cookies by changing your browser settings and force blocking all cookies on this website. But this will always prompt you to accept/refuse cookies when revisiting our site.

We fully respect if you want to refuse cookies but to avoid asking you again and again kindly allow us to store a cookie for that. You are free to opt out any time or opt in for other cookies to get a better experience. If you refuse cookies we will remove all set cookies in our domain.

We provide you with a list of stored cookies on your computer in our domain so you can check what we stored. Due to security reasons we are not able to show or modify cookies from other domains. You can check these in your browser security settings.

Google Analytics Cookies

These cookies collect information that is used either in aggregate form to help us understand how our website is being used or how effective our marketing campaigns are, or to help us customize our website and application for you in order to enhance your experience.

If you do not want that we track your visit to our site you can disable tracking in your browser here:

Other external services

We also use different external services like Google Webfonts, Google Maps, and external Video providers. Since these providers may collect personal data like your IP address we allow you to block them here. Please be aware that this might heavily reduce the functionality and appearance of our site. Changes will take effect once you reload the page.

Google Webfont Settings:

Google Map Settings:

Google reCaptcha Settings:

Vimeo and Youtube video embeds:

Other cookies

The following cookies are also needed - You can choose if you want to allow them:

Privacy Policy

You can read about our cookies and privacy settings in detail on our Privacy Policy Page.

Privacy Policy
Accept settingsHide notification only