A court has found a low-paid casual hairdresser's two-year restraint on poaching clients "void and unenforceable" because it is "significantly longer" than necessary to protect her former employer's legitimate business interests, taking into account the absence of compensation for the non-compete clause and the nature of client relationships.
Having trouble using your subscription? Contact us for help or check our FAQ page here for answers to commonly asked questions.
Non subscribers: Access Workplace Express by starting your subscription here.
Haven't seen Workplace Express before? For a 28-day free trial sign up here.
Go back to our homepage here.