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

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 nip it in the bud.

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.

COVID-19 Whistleblower Succeeds in Automatic Unfair Dismissal Claim

During the COVID-19 pandemic, many employees have complained that social distancing and other precautions were not enforced with sufficient rigour in their workplaces. As an Employment Tribunal (ET) ruling in a whistleblowing case made plain, employers are obliged to treat such concerns with the utmost seriousness. A sales assistant was extremely worried that rules in place to counter the pandemic were not being consistently followed in the shop where she worked. Amongst other things, she told…

Use of Similar Fact Evidence in Employment Proceedings – Guideline Ruling

In a criminal context, prosecutors often rely on similar fact evidence in order to show that a defendant has a propensity to behave in a particular way – but can such evidence also be deployed in employment proceedings? The Employment Appeal Tribunal (EAT) focused on that issue in a guideline case. The case concerned an energy broker who complained to an Employment Tribunal (ET) that unlawful deductions had been made from her wages in that she had not been paid all commissions due to her. She…

Furlough Whistleblower Succeeds in Automatic Unfair Dismissal Claim

Employees are entitled to insist that their employers abide by their legal obligations and should never be penalised for doing so. The point was made by the case of a woman who pointed out that a meeting with her boss had extended beyond her agreed working hours under the COVID-19 furlough scheme. The sales manager was on part-time flexible furlough during the pandemic and, on most days, her agreed working hours were between 10am and 4pm. During a performance review meeting with her boss, she…