Non Compete Clause
Discussion
Not asking for myself but for a friend. No really.
He is a freelance contractor working on tenders in a particular field. So tends to be contracted for periods of around 6 months at a time to work on specific tenders. In his last one he failed to note a non-compete clause in the contract which prevents him working for a competitor for 6 months. Which is a trifle restrictive when its his job! Obviously couldnt work on the same tender but doesnt want to do that.
Is there a recommended lawyer he could speak to about his?
He is a freelance contractor working on tenders in a particular field. So tends to be contracted for periods of around 6 months at a time to work on specific tenders. In his last one he failed to note a non-compete clause in the contract which prevents him working for a competitor for 6 months. Which is a trifle restrictive when its his job! Obviously couldnt work on the same tender but doesnt want to do that.
Is there a recommended lawyer he could speak to about his?
akirk said:
pretty sure that a non-compete is invalid if it prevents someone from earning their living...
I thought it was more that it's invalid if it's unreasonably restrictive. I wouldn't want to go through the courts to argue over a 6 month clause, but then I'm no lawyer.Maybe speaking to the company and asking them to change it to 2 or 3 months would be more beneficial?
jammy-git said:
akirk said:
pretty sure that a non-compete is invalid if it prevents someone from earning their living...
I thought it was more that it's invalid if it's unreasonably restrictive. I wouldn't want to go through the courts to argue over a 6 month clause, but then I'm no lawyer.Maybe speaking to the company and asking them to change it to 2 or 3 months would be more beneficial?
- non-compete in geographic area, but that is where you live / work
- non-compete in a specific market vertical - but that is where you have expertise
- etc.
however a non-compete in one market where you have another 20+ markets you could work in would not be unreasonably restrictive...
so it really depends on the wider and the specific details
I would approach the company applying the clause and ask them if they would be happy to pay for the 6 months non-compete. If not, tell them the clause is too restrictive as it stops you earning your living and should be struck out. Then get on with a new contract, the onus would be on them to go to court, not you.
Edited to add: You are not even an employee, I would think it difficult for them to make this stick in court should they decide to go that route.
Edited to add: You are not even an employee, I would think it difficult for them to make this stick in court should they decide to go that route.
Edited by KevinCamaroSS on Thursday 8th February 08:46
I would keep quit, and say nothing and ignore it, its a std clause, and they probably don't know its there in that contract. I've been tender manager on a few big process project of 1/2 billion or more, and you bring people in and let them go all the time, but you would not normal give those people access to propitiatory info like labour efficiency or cost rates, or propitiatory engineering or process info. Probably a std clause they apply to staff who do get such access.
Gassing Station | Business | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff