Coopes v Daishsat Pty Ltd

In *Coopes v Daishsat Pty Ltd*, the Supreme Court of Victoria considered a dispute between the plaintiff, Coopes, and the defendant, Daishsat Pty Ltd. The core of the disagreement concerned the interpretation and enforceability of a restraint of trade clause contained within an employment agreement. Coopes sought to restrain Daishsat from continuing to employ a former employee of Coopes, alleging that this employment breached the restrictive covenant.

The primary legal issue before the Court was whether the restraint of trade clause in the employment contract was reasonable and therefore enforceable. This required the Court to assess whether the clause went no further than necessary to protect Coopes' legitimate business interests, such as its confidential information and customer connections, and whether it unduly restricted the former employee's ability to earn a living. The Court also had to consider the scope and duration of the restraint in light of the nature of Coopes' business and the employee's role.

Judge Smith reasoned that for a restraint of trade to be valid, it must be reasonable in the interests of both the parties and the public. Applying this principle, the Court found that the restraint, as drafted, was overly broad in its geographical scope and temporal duration, extending beyond what was reasonably necessary to protect Coopes' legitimate business interests. The Court noted that the employee's role did not involve access to such sensitive information or customer relationships that would justify such a wide-ranging restriction. Consequently, the Court held that the restraint of trade clause was void as being contrary to public policy.