Non-compete clauses should be enforced when the business (usually an employer or new business purchaser):
- has advice from an employment law firm that the restraint is likely to be enforceable
- has evidence that a person has breached the clause
- the competing activities have caused harm to the business
- the harm is significant enough to warrant enforcing the clause
Ultimately, the question of when a non-compete should be enforced is about weighing up the cost of enforcement with the harm caused to the business.
Is the restraint clause enforceable?
If a non-compete clause is not enforceable then there’s no point spending money to try and enforce it. Courts will only uphold a restraint clause that is both:
- reasonable, and
- necessary to protect the interests of the business
The first step should be to get advice from an employment lawyer experienced in non-compete clauses.
Is there evidence that a person has breached the non-compete clause?
It is not enough to assume that a clause has or might be breached. There must be evidence that the clause has not been complied with. This may take the form of:
- customers confirming that they have been contacted by the person
- computer logs or records, including emails
- recorded telephone conversations (that have been legally obtained)
- company or business registration and proof that the person is carrying out competing trading activities
Has the business suffered loss because of competing activities?
The need to show that some loss has been suffered is only relevant if the restraint is being enforced to recover money. Loss does not necessarily need to be proven if the business is instead seeking an injunction.
An injunction is a Court order that prevents the person from continuing to breach the non-compete.
Is the business willing to spend money to enforce the clause?
Lawyers don’t often talk about how much money it costs to enforce a non-compete clause. The bottom line is that it is expensive.
The cost is even higher if a business is seeking both damages and injunction.
Potential legal costs need to be weighed up against the value of the harm to the business. Sometimes this harm is easy to calculate and sometimes it is the prospect of harm that should be the focus.