Dundoen Pty Limited v Richard Wills (Real Estate) Pty Limited

Dundoen Pty Limited sought an interlocutory injunction against Richard Wills (Real Estate) Pty Limited and its former Senior Property Manager, Mr. Wills, to restrain him from working for a competitor real estate agency. The dispute arose out of an employment agreement between Mr. Wills and Dundoen, which included post-employment restraints on solicitation and dealing with clients of Dundoen, as well as a restriction from working with a competitor. The agreement was entered into two and a half years into Mr. Wills’ tenure. The primary judge found that there was a serious question to be tried as to the validity and reasonableness of the non-compete restraint and the duration of the non-solicitation restraint.

The court needed to decide whether there was a serious question to be tried regarding the validity and reasonableness of the post-employment restraints, as well as the adequacy of damages as a substitute for an injunction, and the balance of convenience. The court found that a serious question was indeed posed concerning the restraints. The non-compete clause was found to be overly broad, and the non-solicitation period was deemed unreasonably long. Additionally, the court considered that Mr. Wills had given some undertakings which could mitigate the restraints. Regarding damages, the court found that they would not be an adequate substitute for an injunction, and the balance of convenience favoured Mr. Wills, given his immediate employment prospects and the limited impact on Dundoen.

The court ultimately declined to grant the interlocutory injunction, finding that while there was a serious question to be tried, the balance of convenience and the inadequacy of damages did not support granting an injunction at that stage. The case will proceed to a full hearing to determine the validity and reasonableness of the restraints. The final orders of the court were that the application for interlocutory injunction was dismissed, and the case would continue to a full hearing to address the merits of the post-employment restraints in Mr. Wills' employment agreement.