The Supreme Court has recently revisited the restrictive covenants in employment contracts in Tillman v Egon Zehnder.
The claimant had a clause in her employment contract that precluded her from being engaged, concerned or interested in a competing business. Holding a minority shareholding in a publicly quoted company was not exempted.
This restrictive covenant was found too broad and an unfair restraint on trade. The blue pencil test came to the rescue: the offending words ‘or interested’ could be deleted without adding anything else and the deletion will not introduce a major change to the overall effect of the restrictive covenant. With the modification, the covenant was enforceable.
The Supreme Court also reminded that the restrictive covenant should be supported by a consideration – legally speaking. This means that the right place for it will be in an employment contract, not in a policy.
On average 55 vulnerabilities are identified daily.
What can I do?
Review your organisations priorities and ask ‘can we afford a breach?’. What do I do during an incident? Who do I involve? When do I involve the ICO?
If you’re unable to answers these questions, you need help from the experts.