A restraint of trade clause containing an 'object clause' stating its purpose as protecting confidentiality will not be read down to exclude protection of customer connection where the operative words plainly extend to customer connection; the object clause functions as a recital and does not control unambiguous operative provisions. A financial planner who deals directly with clients in a confidential advisory capacity is the 'human face' of the business, and the employer has a protectable interest in that customer connection even where some clients are the employee's personal friends or relatives. A 'no dealing' restraint (prohibiting acceptance of instructions, not merely solicitation) is reasonable where the strength of the customer connection is such that clients will follow the employee unsolicited. However, a restraint extending to clients not personally serviced by the employee, or to clients of related companies in a corporate group, is excessive absent evidence the employee acquired special knowledge of or influence over those clients.
The full text is available to signed-in members, including the 78 later cases that cite this judgment.
9 of the 78 citing cases carry a classified treatment. How each court treated it is available to signed-in members.