Non-Solicitation Agreement

[parmjit.chandhok]

Hi,

I have been asked to sign an agreement it reads as follows

"Neither party will, either alone or jointly with another or others in any capacity, whether directly or indirectly through any other person, firm of Licensor and whether for its or their benefit or that of others during and for a period of twenty four (24) monthy following the termination of this Agreement solicit away from the other or any director, employee, agent, consultant or independent contractor who is on the termination of this Agreement a director, employee, agent, consultant or independent contractor of the other."

From this I was a bit confused as to me it read either of the party who decide to terminate the employment will be obligied not to replace or find a new job in the same capacity of the current job.

Do I read it correctly? I am working in a specific area of the business and it means I can't get another job, for 24 months, if I want to change. Can the employer enforce this on me?

Kind regards.

[Unicorn]

Hi,

I have been asked to sign an agreement it reads as follows

"Neither party will, either alone or jointly with another or others in any capacity, whether directly or indirectly through any other person, firm of Licensor and whether for its or their benefit or that of others during and for a period of twenty four (24) monthy following the termination of this Agreement solicit away from the other or any director, employee, agent, consultant or independent contractor who is on the termination of this Agreement a director, employee, agent, consultant or independent contractor of the other."


Do I read it correctly?.

No, it means you can't poach staff.

[RichardCranium]

Paraphrasing into nearer English:

"Neither party will employ anyone who is at the time of the termination of this Agreement working for the other, neither during nor for 2 years after this Agreement."

Whoever wrote that was a wally.

For a start 2 years is excessive; a court would support 6 months but not 2 years.

It says you cannot poach someone from X during the contract who is working for X at the end of the contract. That's silly and would be struck out by a court as meaningless because it is badly written.

Also, you cannot have an agreement in a contract that exists outside the termination of the contract. That's silly and is not quite what they meant.

If it is between your LtdCo and an agency, it says they are not to place you in the future. I think it also means they should not give you an extension.

They have tried to be clever and made a hash of it. What they meant was "When you work through us as an agency, you can't work direct for ClientCo for 2 years". Only they didn't say that.

[thunderlizard]

I am tickled by the idea of soliciting away an "independent contractor". If they're in a position to be "solicited away" from, they can't have been very independent in the first place.

[northernladuk]

Have seen a couple of clauses like this and similar stuff in permie ones saying you can't work for customers/competitors and the like. While i was permie I think every job I took broke this clause.

At the end of the day they can only enforce it by sending some nasty letters or starting legal proceedings i guess.

Has anyone seen this happen at all?