Upholding Restraint of Trade (ROT) Clauses

The statements made by the employer appear to coincide with an unlawful promise of benefits, and therefore, are unacceptable in relation to the act. The concept of “positive coercion” is addressed in the case study, and these actions directly influence the manner

Yates, Richard A., Teresa Bereznicki-Korol, and Trevor Clark. Business Law in Canada Tenth Edition. Toronto: Pearson, 2013 (pg. 135)

The National Labor Relations Act seeks to promote collective bargaining to resolve employer and employee concerns. Because many agreements between labor and management sometimes affect and/or restrain competition under the context of the Sherman Act of 1890, a

When we are dealing with the employment relationship between employers and employees, ethical issues are most likely to emerge. Especially, if a manager fires a worker without a proper reason, critics will follow this employer’s behavior. In Patricia Werhane’s paper, “Employment at Will and Due Process”, discusses two doctrines which are Employment at Will (EAW) and Due Process. It also addresses some justifications and objections for EAW, and shows Werhane’s supportive view to Due Process. In contrast, EAW is defended by Richard Epstein in his article “In Defense of the Contract at Will”. In my paper, I will attempt to develop my argument in favor of Employment at Will that could improve flexibility and efficiency of

However, it can hear almost every employment law matter since its jurisdiction increased. Before 1994, Employment Tribunals could only hear statutory claims while after the Employment Tribunals Extension of Jurisdiction (England and Wales) Order 1994, Employment Tribunals' role has drastically changed that they can now hear common law claims(Richard Kinder,1999). But there are some law matters of common law they cannot cope with like matters relating to moral tights and copyright, patents, designs rights, trade marks; breach of restraint of trade covenants; breach of confidence; breach of a contract terms requiring the employer to provide for the employee; personnel injury claims. From this regard, certain employment matters still have to be tackled in the civil courts.

No compete clauses are not pervasive in public or private industry but they often exist in situations and with people where trade secrets and other sensitive information is potentially at risk. Employers do so to protect themselves but many states and territories around the world either highly restrict them or outright ban them from even being implemented due to it ostensibly being unfair or punitive to the employee. The author of this paper is asked to focus on a fictional situation involving a non-compete clause and is asked to answer several different questions. The elements of a non-compete clause that must be present are to be explained as well as a number of related concepts including offer, acceptance, capacity and so on. The author is asked whether common law or UCC applies to non-compete agreements and what part(s) of the agreement would make the aforementioned fictitious agreement unenforceable.

However, the law is not stringent enough. This can be illustrated by the comparison between Hong Kong and the UK insider dealing law. For

The paper Legal Obligations and the Duty of Fair Trade by, John Rawls states an intellectual connection between law and justice and that following the law for some individuals is fair play. Throughout this paper, Rawls strives to get his point across. There were three influential points that Rawls stated that assisted his argument. John Rawls, first I will begin by proving the fact that following a law does not guarantee that we will be producing overall good. The authors next main point was to make it a clear point that laws are similar to obligations. Lastly, I will discuss his topic on how voting has no promises that you will get a respectable result. I believe that the author presents his argument that laws are made for order and that

The statutory claim for unfair dismissal recognises that the common law cannot give adequate protection to the employees through the contract of employment, in that wrongful dismissal claim depends upon a breach of contract of the employment, usually in the form of inadequate notice being given by the employer. Many dismissals can be considered unfair that do not amount to the breach of the contract, for the wrongful dismissal claims look not to intention, motive, or the effect on an employee of a termination of the relationship nor to the procedural protections, but merely to the form of in which that relationship has been brought to the end. This paper will compare and contrast the different area between wrongful dismissal and unfair dismissal.

The role of the tribunal and court systems in enforcing employment law is to ensure that cases brought before them are dealt with in a fair and consistent manner. Delivering an outcome that is consistent with the facts put before them. They have to consider the evidence placed by both the employee and the employer. In most cases it is for the employer to prove that they handled the case appropriately taking account of their internal procedures and ensuring that they were not in breach of any relevant employment legislation related to the employee and their circumstances.

A Contract requires several elements in order to be considered enforceable. However for the purpose of this essay we would explore one of these elements in order to effectively understand the controversial cases of Williams v Roffey Brothers and Nicholls (contractors) Ltd (1990) and Stilk v Myrick (1804). Before going any further one should briefly understand the doctrine of Consideration. Despite the vast amount of content written, the doctrine of consideration is still to this day unclear due to the inconsistency of the courts and its application of necessary rules. Consideration refers to that which the law deems as valuable in that the promisor receives from the promise that which was promised. In other words, it is the exchange of something of value between the parties in a contract. One should be mindful that in English law, every promise may not be legally enforceable; it requires the court to distinguish between are enforceable and non-enforceable obligations. This brings us to the controversial cases of Stilk v Myrick and Williams v the Roffery brothers. Many argue that that the case of Williams was wrongly decided leading to impairments in the rule initially established in Stilk v Myrick. This essay seek to analyse and critique the cases of Stilk v Myrick and Williams v Roffey Brothers and also highlight whether or not the new rule of Practical benefit lead to serious impairments in later cases.

Employers have taken favor to these provided addendums in employment contracts and given all the requirements met have seen to be commonly enforced in the court of law. They are often popular in the market of media-related jobs, or any profession related to exposed entertainment personnel, like radio and media broadcasting. However, court systems and many states are not in total favor of this anti-competition covenant, some states have placed their own statutory restrictions on the covenant (ex: Florida). The state of California has actually ban these restrictive agreements when applied to employment contracts, unless the contract is under the sell of a business.

This essay will argue that the concept of ‘worker’ defined under section 230 of the Employment Rights Act (“ERA”) 1996 is board; however, due to the undefined scope of section 230(3) of ERA 1996, employment tribunals and the courts have adapted a rigid approach in their interpretation; that there is a ‘high degree of legal uncertainty’ as established in this area of law; that the law does not adequately deal with non-standard forms of ‘workers’; present proposals for reform by the UK Parliament on the interpretation and application of law at common; and finally provide a conclusion for the arguments put forth.

3 4 11 FOREWORD INTRODUCTION - Getting to know Singapore OVERVIEW OF LEGAL ENVIRONMENT - Legal Framework - Handling Civil Disputes - Employment - Immigration - Competition Act - Singapore's Free Trade Agreement (FTAs) STARTING A BUSINESS BANKING RELATIONSHIP IN SINGAPORE - Introduction to the Financial Landscape in Singapore - Banking in Singapore - Business Credit Facilities - Business Protection TYPES OF BUSINESS ORGANISATIONS - Sole Proprietorships and General Partnerships - Limited Liability Partnerships - Limited Partnerships - Companies - Joint Ventures - Foreign Companies - Representative Offices - Incorporating a Company - Annual Requirements for

This essay aims to compare the industrial relations in both Singapore and Japan. It will first indentify both countries industrial relation system, whether it is unitarist, pluralist or radical. It will then touch on the various aspects in the industrial relation system: trade unions, system to resolving industrial conflicts, wages related policies and discrimination at work. In addition, it will look at the policy of lifetime employment and seniority in wages, policies which Japan companies have been well-known for adopting. This essay will then conclude and summary, to what extend are both system similar or different, after comparing the various aspects as listed above.