PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE – interlocutory application for urgent injunctive relief – where respondent a former employee of applicant’s – where employment contract contained restraint clause prohibiting post-employment solicitation of clients – where respondent tendered resignation to commence employment with applicant’s competitor – where applicant seeks injunction to prevent solicitation of clients – enforceability of covenants in restraint of trade – whether prima facie case established – whether balance of convenience favours grant of injunction – application dismissed.
Related cases – restraint of trade
-
Blue Rock Australia PL v Kaushik [2025] FCA 176
PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE – interlocutory application for urgent injunctive relief – where respondent a former employee of applicant’s – where employment contract contained restraint clause prohibiting post-employment solicitation of clients – where respondent tendered resignation to commence employment with applicant’s competitor – where applicant seeks injunction to prevent solicitation of clients – enforceability of covenants…
-
Blue Rock Australia Pty Ltd v Kaushik [2025] FCA 176 (11 March 2025)
PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE – interlocutory application for urgent injunctive relief – where respondent a former employee of applicant’s – where employment contract contained restraint clause prohibiting post-employment solicitation of clients – where respondent tendered resignation to commence employment with applicant’s competitor – where applicant seeks injunction to prevent solicitation of clients – enforceability of covenants…
-
Harman v Opus Recruitment Solutions – Australia Pty Ltd (Stay Application) [2024] FCA 1356
INDUSTRIAL LAW – application to declare restrictive covenants in an employment contract and shareholder agreement invalid – where each of the clauses are respectively the subject of exclusive jurisdiction clauses of New South Wales and England and Wales – applications for declarations that the employment ceased by reason of redundancy and also as to how…
For more information, see the original judgement.
