Advertisement

June 19, 2013

UK Employment Alert No 203: Employee Duties/Employer Protections

The departure of an employee to work for a competitor, or for their own fledgling business, can pose significant risks to their previous employer’s business. These risks have been emphasised in two recent cases in which employers discovered the hard way the need for careful drafting of employment contracts, and practical management of the employment relationship from beginning to end.

The Decisions

In Ranson v Customer Systems Plc [2012] EWCA Civ 841, which was decided last month by the Court of Appeal, Mr Ranson had taken steps to set up a new business while still working for Customer Systems Plc. His employment contract, which he had signed ten years earlier as a graduate entrant, included no post-termination restrictions and no specific language regarding duties he owed during employment. Customer Systems Plc sued Mr Ranson, alleging that he had breached implied fiduciary duties and an implied duty of fidelity by making preparations to start his new business before leaving. The Court of Appeal found, however, that employees below the level of director are not required to put their employer’s interest before their own, without specific obligations to that effect in their contracts.

In a High Court case, CEF Holdings Limited v Complete Electric Solutions Ltd [2012] EWHC 1524 (QB), the Court considered an injunction application by an employer that aimed to stop former junior employees from working for a competitor. Although the employees had restrictive covenants in their contracts, these covenants were drafted too widely to be enforceable. In addition, the fact that the contracts of the employees’ managers did not contain similar restrictions, and that the employees concerned had only a one week notice period, weakened the employer’s argument that such provisions were necessary and appropriate.

What Does This Mean for Employers?

These cautionary tale cases illustrate that the level of obligation owed by an employee should reflect accurately their seniority and importance to the business. An employer could consider making additional restrictive covenants or contractual duties a key condition of a pay raise or promotion.

If enforceability of restrictive covenants is of commercial importance to an employer, it is vital to have tailored drafting that is consistent with not only the employee's individual role and contract, but also the hierarchy of the workplace.

Kathryn Ilczyszyn, a trainee solicitor at the London office, has contributed to this article. 

© 2013 McDermott Will & Emery

About the Author

Partner

Katie Clark is a partner in the law firm of McDermott Will & Emery UK LLP, based in its London office.  Her practice focuses on contentious and non-contentious employment matters. 

Katie is recognised as a leader in her field in Chambers UK 2011.  She is described as a “recognised force for her advocacy and commercial employment advice”, Chambers UK 2010 and as “very knowledgeable, superbly responsive, and no-nonsense…” Legal 500 UK 2011.

Her clients include global corporations, financial...

+44 20 7577 3492

About the Author

Senior Counsel

David Dalgarno is senior counsel in the law firm of McDermott Will & Emery UK LLP, based in its London office.  His practice focuses on employment, labour and discrimination law particularly concerned with the human relations issues that arise during business change.  He has advised on the integration of investment banks, the establishment of joint venture businesses, inward investment, acquisitions, disposals and reorganisation downsizing exercises.  He also advises on employee benefit and share scheme issues.   Clients include investment banks...

+ 44 20 7577 6945

Contributors

Partner

Sharon Tan is a partner in the firm of McDermott Will & Emery UK LLP, based in its London office.  Her practice focuses on all aspects of contentious and non-contentious employment law.

Sharon has extensive litigation experience.  She frequently handles matters such as complex discrimination, whistleblowing and unfair dismissal claims in the Employment Tribunal, the Employment Appeal Tribunal and the Court of Appeal.  She also has significant experience of handling High Court litigation, including injunctions and contractual disputes.

Sharon regularly...

+44 20 7577 3488

Boost: AJAX core statistics

Legal Disclaimer

You are responsible for reading, understanding and agreeing to the National Law Review's (NLR’s) and the National Law Forum LLC's  Terms of Use and Privacy Policy before using the National Law Review website. The National Law Review is a free to use, no-log in database of legal and business articles. The content and links on www.NatLawReview.com are intended for general information purposes only. Any legal analysis, legislative updates or other content and links should not be construed as legal or professional advice or a substitute for such advice. No attorney-client or confidential relationship is formed by the transmission of information between you and the National Law Review website or any of the law firms, attorneys or other professionals or organizations who include content on the National Law Review website. If you require legal or professional advice, kindly contact an attorney or other suitable professional advisor.  

Some states have laws and ethical rules regarding solicitation and advertisement practices by attorneys and/or other professionals. NLR does not accept advertising from attorneys or law firms. The National Law Review is not a law firm nor is www.NatLawReview.com  intended to be an advertisement or a referral service for attorneys and/or other professionals. The NLR does not wish, nor does it intend, to solicit the business of anyone or to refer anyone to an attorney or other professional.  NLR does not answer legal questions nor will we refer you to an attorney or other professional if you request such information from us. 

Under certain state laws the following statements may be required on this website and we have included them in order to be in full compliance with these rules. The choice of a lawyer or other professional is an important decision and should not be based solely upon advertisements. Attorney Advertising Notice: Prior results do not guarantee a similar outcome. Statement in compliance with Texas Rules of Professional Conduct. Unless otherwise noted, attorneys are not certified by the Texas Board of Legal Specialization, nor can NLR attest to the accuracy of any notation of Legal Specialization or other Professional Credentials.