Back
Get in Touch Menu

Breach of contract – or not?

19 March 2013

Restrictive covenants in employment contracts are frequently the cause of disputes and have been described by Lord Justice Underhill as “the most powerful weapon in the employer’s armoury”.

This is because of the potentially significant impact they can have on employees’ activities after leaving a job. However, despite being included as a standard term in most employment contracts, the guiding principle regarding enforceability is that they must be no wider than is reasonably necessary to protect the employer’s legitimate commercial interests. Increasingly, courts have come to construe them narrowly, as a recent High Court decision demonstrates.

In Threlfall v ECD Insight Ltd, an ex-employee claimed a larger equity share in his former employer’s business and, in response, the employer counterclaimed that the employee was in breach of his restrictive covenants. Under the contract of employment, Mr Threlfall was entitled to a share in the equity of ECD in addition to his salary. This was dependent upon a period of minimum service and the contract also stipulated that if he left the company to pursue competitive activities, the equity share provision would be void. During his time at the company, Mr Threlfall developed a sideline in providing services in event mediation. When he left to work for Reuters news agency, he continued with event mediation in addition to his main job with Reuters. ECD alleged that this was in breach of the terms of his contract and therefore refused to pay the equity share.

The court ruled that Mr Threlfall had not left his job for the sole purpose of continuing to provide event mediation and therefore found that he had not forfeited his entitlement to his share. More importantly, the court applied the 2010 decision of Phoenix Partners Group LLP v Asoyag and ruled that, as no one else provided the mediation services at ECD after Mr Threlfall left, the company could not claim that he was performing activities which impacted upon their business.

This case is of particular relevance to small employers where there may only be one person performing certain tasks in the business. Restrictive covenants are a complex and increasingly litigious aspect of employment contracts and should always be drafted in a manner which balances the interests of the company with the rights of the employee to seek employment in their area of expertise.

For more information please contact our employment law team. 

Contact us

Disclaimer: All legal information is correct at the time of publication but please be aware that laws may change over time. This article contains general legal information but should not be relied upon as legal advice. Please seek professional legal advice about your specific situation - contact us; we’d be delighted to help.
Contact
Matthew Clayton MA LLM (Cantab), CIPP/E
Partner
View profile
Mathew Clayton
Related services
Share this article
Resources to help

Related articles

Government plans for more certain working hours for employees

Employment & business immigration

The new Labour government has scrapped the Conservative bill that gives workers the right to request a predictable working pattern, in favour of stronger, more certain working hours. As well…

Hifsa O'Kelly LLB (Hons)
Associate, solicitor

TUPE: New rules are now in effect

Employment & business immigration

Changes to the Transfer of Undertakings (Protection of Employment) Regulations 2006 (TUPE) are now in effect for transfers taking place on or after 1 July 2024. The new rules relating…

Jenny Hawrot LLB (Hons)
Partner

Tipping Act to be introduced on 1 October 2024

Employment & business immigration

The new ‘Tipping Act’ will come into force on 1 October 2024. The new Employment (Allocation of Tips) Act 2023 – also known as the Tipping Act – is to…

Klára Grmelová MGR (LLM Czech)
Solicitor
Contact us