Hanna v OAMPS Insurance Brokers Ltd

Hanna v OAMPS Insurance Brokers Ltd concerned a dispute between an employer, OAMPS Insurance Brokers Ltd, and a former employee, Mr Hanna, regarding a post-employment restraint deed. The case was heard on appeal in the Court of Appeal of New South Wales.

The central legal issues before the court were whether the cascading clause within the restraint deed was void for uncertainty, and whether the provisions, which appeared repetitive and overlapping, were contrary to public policy under section 4(1) of the Restraints of Trade Act 1976 (NSW). The court also considered the reasonableness of the restraint period.

The Court of Appeal, in dismissing the appeal, reasoned that the individual covenants within the deed were capable of being understood and complied with without breaching any other covenant, and therefore the cascading clause was not void for uncertainty. The court found no requirement for a specific mechanism dictating the order of operation of the restraints. Regarding the reasonableness of the restraint period, the court noted there is no single legally mandated test, and the appropriate approach depends on the specific facts and evaluation of what is reasonable. The totality of the evidence, including material demonstrating the high regard Mr Hanna was held in by his commercial clients, was deemed sufficient to support the primary judge's findings.

The appeal was dismissed with costs.