Can anyone recommend an Employment lawyer re: Anti-competitive clauses and redundancy?

[Cheesetoastie]

DH is in the process of being made redundant - 3 weeks ago he was told that the company was closing the siite. There is a job similar to his current one being advertised at the moment at a firm very near to us - so would be ideal (if he could get it) - but he has a clause in his contract that says he can't work for a 'rival' company within 3 months of leaving current firm.
Does anyone know how often these contracts are enforced in cases of redundancy? Dh has asked at work and the current feeling is that they want him to keep working until a date not yet specified - but that includes his month's notice. And that the clause in the contract will be enforced unless he stays until they say he can go.
My head is spinning with all this - and I am not sure what the company can do as 'enforcement' - sue us? for what/how much? He is not entitled to redundancy pay as he hasn't been there long enough (we moved house last year for this job - arghh)
Any advice or recommendation for an employment lawyer??

cheesetoastie I'm not a lawyer but I can't imagine for one minute they'd be able to enforce that if they are making him redundant.

Have a look here about finding new work - there's a section on starting a new job before notice expires and some things you can do.

Hyia. I am not an employment lawyer myself, but yes, to enforce the restrictive covenant, they would have to sue you. From what I know, it is not very often done. In any event they would have a tought case seeing that one through as by making your DH redundant and preventing him from joining that company they would be depriving him from a living.

Also to be reasonable theses restrictive covenant should be restrictive both in terms of time (eg: 12 months) and geography (eg: 5 miles) to be reasonable. If they are not reasonable, they are not enforceable.

My gut feeling would be that they couldn't use this in a redundancy situation.

To find an employement laywer. go on the lawsociety website, you can then do a geographical search for an employement lawyer.

Good luck

I knew we'd had a thread recently about this, see here for discussion on what can be done to enforce these.

Thank you both - I will look at the link and do the law society search.

If he wasn't being made redundant we think that the clause is 'reasonable' ie. 3 months and the other firm is within the same geographical area...but it seems so mean to enforce it given the circumstances!

Sorry flowerybeanbag - I didn't search the archives, am a bit in shock, had relief that there was a job he could apply to, then despair that it was being blocked.
Thanks for the link

I agree, it would be reasonable under normal circumstances but I can't imagine they'd get anywhere claiming it is reasonable given they are putting him out of a job. I'm sure he'll be fine.

No that's fine, it's only that I remembered the thread, was only able to find it because I knew who started it and where it was started

Hi, restrictive covenanats are inherently contracts in restraint of trade, and therefore will only be enforced by the courts if they are reasonable, ie justified by reference to the legitimate business interests of the employer.

If the business is no longer there then it can hardly be said that he is working for a competitor.

Also, an area restricition will be considered critically by the courts, since it will frequently amount to a covenant against competition, which would generally be unenforceable.

I would also like to point out that I would imagine the courts would take a dim view of your DH's current firm basically holding him to ransom like this. Everyone is entitled to earn a living!

I can recommend an expensive but excellent employment lawyer if you still need one.

DH works in the financial IT sector where people tend to move around a lot and he says that a restriction that prevents a person working for another firm is not legally enforceable. I can't remember the term he told me, but basically nobody can have the right to prevent an individual from earning a living. They can, however, prevent someone from taking patentable ideas or clients with them to a new firm.

Your dh should go ahead and do whatever suits him best and not tell his current employer until the decision is made, even then he doesn't have to tell them anything if they make him redundant before he needs to give notice. It's none of their business, but if they think he's applying for other jobs they may try to bully him by threatening court action.

Thanks for everyone' s comments -will get dh to read when he gets back.
I may be back to ask you for the lawyer's number Seeker - it depends on whether dh got to speak to one this pm.
Yes Bran, my feeling now, is that they are using this to 'bully' staff into staying long enough to close the site down 'properly' rather than there being any substance to the threat.

I think in the short term he should just try for this role with the other company and see if they want him - and we'll deal with complications if/when he has a job offer.

Thanks everyone.