Employment · Employment fee-earner, partner, client-facing associate
Restraint of trade, research answer to client update
A twelve-month non-compete across the UK, Ireland and the EU is checked against the restraint-of-trade doctrine, then rewritten as a letter a lay client can act on.
- Agents
- First draft
- A nine-authority research answer in under a minute, then a plain-English client update from the same matter.
- Steps
- 5
The problem
Step 01 of 05
Ask the question
Whether a twelve-month covenant preventing employment by any law firm in the UK, Ireland or the EU is enforceable, and whether severance of the offending words is available.
Step 02 of 05
Read the nine authorities
The starting position is that the covenant is void unless it protects a legitimate interest; severance is available on narrow conditions only.
Step 03 of 05
Write it for the client
The Employment Agent runs with Prepare for: Client Update and Deliver as: PDF, using the chat thread as a source, and is told not to present an arguable position as a certainty.
Step 04 of 05
Read the client update
Plain English, short sentences, citations in brackets at the end of the paragraph, and a recommended narrower covenant.
Step 05 of 05
Sign off and share
The managing partner reads the letter, opens Authorities, clicks Verify all, and either downloads the PDF or shares it with a passcode link.
What comes back
A document, not a transcript.
- A legal note for the associate citing nine authorities on enforceability and severance.
- A plain-English client letter built from the same authorities, with no section numbers in the body.
- A recommended narrower covenant: three to six months, tied to competing work, actual offices and clients with material dealings.
- Action items and open questions shared across both versions of the answer.
Authorities it checks
- Nordenfelt v Maxim Nordenfelt Guns and Ammunition Co Ltd [1894] AC 535
- Herbert Morris Ltd v Saxelby [1916] 1 AC 688
- Tillman v Egon Zehnder Ltd [2019] UKSC 32
- Harcus Sinclair LLP v Your Lawyers Ltd [2021] UKSC 32
- Credico Marketing Ltd v Lambert [2021] EWCA Civ 1504
What it does not do
- It does not tell the client the covenant is unenforceable outright; 'very unlikely to be enforced' is a deliberately different sentence.
- It does not draft the replacement covenant as a signature-ready clause without a fee-earner reviewing the client's specific facts.
- It does not vary an existing signed contract; the note flags that separate advice is needed before doing so.