This happened to my brother in the UK years ago and in the end (it took ages) the court declared in his favour. i.e. the clause was not valid.
This happened to my brother in the UK years ago and in the end (it took ages) the court declared in his favour. i.e. the clause was not valid.
But you still have to go through the court to get there - time and money for you, while they have replaced you and got new people working with your clients.
What if they have a good lawyer???
More seriously - what happens generally if people refuse to sign these sort of clauses?
Do employers normally back down or do they just refuse to hire?
>> you will get damages back covering time spent away
That is typical lawyer talk.
You're lucky if you can collect 50-60% of what you spent on lawyer fees here in HK in a civil action (based on my recent experience). Even judgements... lets not get into the impractical process of collecting on them.
Can take months if not years for a civil action to go through the courts, as the lawyers will keep negotiating all sorts of loopholes / filing writs (and thereby building their hourly costs up)...
If you have a good lawyer, the best they can do is posture and intimidate and get the other party to settle out of court.
Not sure how they calculate time lost / spent. Also don't think they can factor in the lost opportunities.
Last edited by KnowItAll; 13-07-2007 at 06:05 PM.
If the employer doesnt promise to pay you at substantially the same rate as when u were employed by them, I dont think the non compete will be upheld in British/US law jurisdictions ( Disclaimer: I am not a lawyer!)
So if u have that clause, you can take a well earned break!