As far as navigation by the “legitimate commercial interest” provision is concerned, too many companies are introducing their non-competition agreements. Much of the non-competition litigation and case law related precisely to this question: what is a legitimate commercial interest? Competition prohibitions may also be applied if the employer can prove that he possesses trade secrets taken and used by the worker or if the worker has received exceptional or specialized training in the form of unique sales, marketing or business methods practiced by the employer. On the other hand, Florida courts are generally reluctant to impose non-compete clauses in which the employee has not registered and used confidential or protected information that would lead to unfair competition. However, there is a blank language that indicates that the interests and difficulties of the employee should not be totally ignored. The court stressed that the non-compete clause against history must be considered, that commercial restriction contracts are generally illegal, and that the law constitutes a separation or exception to such a general prohibition, which “strikes a delicate balance between legitimate business interests and a person`s inalienable right to work.” 57 The inalienable right to work is protected by the Florida Constitution.58 In addition to carefully crafting your non-compete rules, be sure how you enforce them. If you let it slide, if an employee violates your non-competition clause, you could be scrutinized if you subsequently try to impose the non-competition clause on another employee. Note that Florida`s non-compete clause does not create any presumptions for or against employer-worker non-compete agreements lasting between six months and two years. Even if the law creates presumptions for and against performance, presumptions may be rebutted if a party provides an appropriate basis for determining the corresponding term. In each of these cases, the courts drew attention to the same author: F.S. 542.335 (1) (g) (1).
This paragraph of the non-competition clause states that the Tribunal does not take into account economic difficulties or other consequences that the agreement may have on the worker when determining the enforceability of a restrictive agreement. An important factor that is not addressed in this article is the fact that each jurisdiction considers specific circumstances when applying a non-competition clause. Having negotiated and negotiated many cases for years, I can say with certainty that proof of infringements, particularly proof of invitation or business with former clients, is essential in determining whether a court will impose a non-competition clause. What type of remedy is available in the event of a breach of a non-competition clause or restrictive agreement? Generally speaking, the right to omission is the preferred remedy sought by a former employer. The employer wants to stop the offences and damage to money is not always easy to recover or prove. In addition, the status of the winning party allows, in the appeal, to collect reasonable attorneys` fees from the party that did not win. This means that the former employee is subject not only to an injunction, but also to the lawyer`s fees incurred by his former employer if the court decides in favour of the former employer. If the non-compete period is too long, it may not be applicable.
Contracts of six months or less are deemed valid, while contracts longer than two years are considered ineffective. However, if the evidence is sufficient, the court may find that an agreement of more than two years is appropriate. Employers have the burden of proving that the duration of the agreement is appropriate. Does this mean that your sources of recommendation are legitimate business interests in favour of a non-compete agreement? Not necessarily. The Supreme Court ruling confirmed the need for courts to decide on a case-by-case basis whether something is a legitimate business interest. . . .