AGA Assistance Australia Pty Ltd v Tokody

The defendant, Ms Tokody, had entered into a contract of employment with the plaintiff, AGA Assistance Australia Pty Ltd, which included a clause prohibiting her from working in a similar or competing business after her employment ended. The restraint clause outlined alternative periods of restraint, and Ms Tokody argued that any of these alternatives constituted an unreasonable restraint on trade and were therefore unenforceable. The dispute was brought before the court to determine the validity and reasonableness of the restraint, as well as the correct commencement date for the restraint period.

The court had to decide whether the restraint provision was reasonable in the interests of the parties and, if so, for what duration. The court also needed to determine whether the period of restraint began on 22 July 2012 or on 22 October 2011. The court examined the nature of the businesses, the legitimate interests of the plaintiff in protecting its business, and the impact of the restraint on Ms Tokody’s ability to find employment. The court considered the principles of reasonableness in restraints of trade and weighed the competing interests of the parties.

The court found that Ms Tokody had been directly involved in a competing business since 22 January 2012, thereby breaching the restraint clause. The court declared that the period of restraint should run until 22 July 2012, which was the date Ms Tokody started her employment with Cover-More Travel Insurance. The court concluded that the restraint was reasonable in the circumstances and enforceable for the specified duration. The court ordered that Ms Tokody be restrained from acting in her employment with Cover-More Travel Insurance until 22 July 2012.