Decisions on post-termination restrictions and garden leave in employment contracts
Decisions on post-termination restrictions and garden leave in employment contracts

The following Employment guidance note provides comprehensive and up to date legal information covering:

  • Decisions on post-termination restrictions and garden leave in employment contracts
  • Garden leave provisions
  • Non-compete (no competition) provisions
  • Non-solicitation provisions
  • Non-dealing provisions
  • Non-disclosure (confidentiality) provisions
  • Team moves
  • Miscellaneous restrictions

This Practice Note summarises key decisions on the enforceability of post-termination restrictions (restrictive covenants) in contracts of employment and sets out examples of cases which practitioners may find helpful as illustrations of the courts’ approach.

For a Practice Note summarising key decisions on restraint of trade provisions in commercial and corporate contracts, see Practice Note: Decisions on restrictive covenants in commercial contracts.

Garden leave provisions

Employers must provide sufficient evidence when attempting to establish a legitimate business aim (ICAP v Berry)
Role CEO ICAP v Berry [2017] EWHC 1321 (QB)
See also News Analysis: Garden leave and TUPE (ICAP Management Services v Berry)
Terms of restriction 12-month notice period with garden leave
Validity Valid
Notable points The protection of confidential information in the employee’s possession was a legitimate business aim. The employee had freely agreed to the garden leave provision within his contract. In addition, the employee was unlikely to be out of pocket or to suffer a reduction or stagnation in skills during the period. The balance of