Financial planners should be alert to any restraint clauses in their employment contract that restrain them from advising their former employer's clients. If those clauses are reasonable they are likely to be enforceable against the planner.
Employers that include restraint clauses in their employment contracts must make sure those clauses are reasonable in length, geographical location and who they cover — otherwise, they will likely be ineffective.
Mr Reeves was a financial planner for Koops Martin Financial Services Pty Limited His employment contract provided that on ending his employment at Koops Martin for the next 12 months he could not — within the city of Coffs Harbour — directly or indirectly, accept instructions to perform any financial planning work from any current or past clients of Koops Martin.
Reeves resigned from Koops Martin and moved to a competing firm. At this new firm, Reeves accepted instructions from several clients of Koops Martin. Then Koops Martin applied for an injunction to restrain Reeves from breaching the contract. Reeves cross-claimed for an order under section 4(3) of the Restraint of Trade Act 1976 (NSW) that the restraint was invalid.
The NSW Supreme Court held that while Reeves had not enticed clients away from Koops Martin or revealed confidential information, he had accepted instructions and performed financial planning work in breach of his contract with Koops Martin.
It was held that the restraint clause was:
The Court ordered that until one year after his employment with Koops Martin ended, Reeves would be restrained from directly or indirectly:
The Courts are prepared to enforce reasonable restraint clauses contained in employment contracts.
Financial planners should be aware of any restraint clauses in their employment contract that restrain them from advising their former employer's clients.
If employers include restraint clauses in their employment contracts, those clauses must be reasonable in their length and geographical location, and will likely be ineffective in preventing former employees from advising clients of the firm who were not originally serviced by the relevant employer.
Daniel is a lawyer in the Maddocks Tax & Revenue team.Daniel advises extensively in the following areas:
His advice covers both direct and indirect tax considerations.
Prior to joining Maddocks, Daniel worked at a Big Four Chartered Accounting Firm focusing on tax consulting for mergers and acquisitions.
The legal information and commentary on this site is general only. Documents ordered through Cleardocs affect the user's legal rights and liabilities. To assess their suitability for the user, legal accounting and financial advice must be obtained.
For more information, contact Maddocks on (03) 9258 3555 and ask to speak to a member of their team.