Plagued by Former Employees Turned Competitors? See a Lawyer Today!

Many business owners lie awake at night worrying that senior employees may leave to set up rival operations, taking clients and confidential information with them. Such conduct is, however, highly likely to be unlawful and, as one case showed, specialist lawyers can very swiftly take steps to…

Mar 05, 2021

Scott graham oqmzwnd3thu unsplash 1024x683

The case concerned a share purchase agreement (SPA), by which a consultancy group acquired the entire issued share capital of a rival company for over £6.4 million. As part of the deal, two of the company’s founders entered into service agreements and stayed on as executive directors.

The company launched proceedings after both men subsequently left its employ and incorporated a new business which operated in an identical field. It alleged that they had joined in a common design to injure its business by unlawful means. They were said to have induced three of the company’s former employees to breach their contracts and to have breached the terms of the SPA and the service agreements. The competitor was accused of inducing those breaches.

After a preliminary hearing, the High Court found that the company had established a powerful and compelling case that the competitor was involved in a major exercise designed to divert away its customers by illegal means. Although the two men had sought to distance themselves from any such activities, the Court noted that they were the competitor’s founding directors. There was a serious issue to be tried as to the true extent of their knowledge of what was going on.

The Court made orders requiring the men and the competitor to preserve evidence that might be relevant to the case and to deliver up any hard-copy documents in their possession, custody or control which belonged to the company or which contained information confidential to the company. Directions were given for a further hearing at which the company would seek more extensive relief.

Dismissal of ‘Anti-Zionist’ Council Employee Ruled Unfair

Employers may come under external pressure to take disciplinary action against an employee, but that is all the more reason to follow a scrupulously fair procedure. The point was made by the case of a council employee who became the focus of media attention after participating in a demonstration outside Parliament. The man worked in the council’s environmental health department. His role was not considered politically sensitive and he was free to attend demonstrations and to state his political…

Dismissal for Misconduct Without a Reasonable Investigation is Rarely Fair

Dismissing an employee for misconduct is very unlikely to be viewed as fair if there has been no proper investigation and no consideration of either mitigation or the possibility of a lesser sanction. An Employment Tribunal (ET) made that point in the case of a veteran music teacher who was sacked for refusing to attend a staff meeting. The teacher, who had worked at the relevant school for 24 years, was told by her boss that attendance at the meeting was not optional. When she informed him…

Employment Judge Embarked on ‘Frolic of his Own’ – EAT Ruling

Employment judges may reconsider their initial conclusions on a case, but that does not give them licence to embark on a wholesale change of mind on the basis of arguments that have not been presented to them. The Employment Appeal Tribunal (EAT) made that point in finding that an employment judge went on a frolic of his own. The case concerned a senior employee of a global company who was seconded on a short-term basis to run its operations in Canada. After his commission payments – which in…