Snow Factories SA v Bucceri

Snow Factories SA sought an interlocutory injunction against Bucceri to prevent him from engaging in activities that would breach a non-compete clause in an agreement. The matter was heard in the Supreme Court of Queensland. The court had to determine whether the restraint of trade clause was valid, reasonable, and enforceable, and whether a serious question to be tried existed. Additionally, the court considered the balance of convenience, given the impact on the goodwill of Snow Factories SA and the livelihood of Bucceri, as well as the adequacy of security provided by Bucceri.

The court found that the restraint of trade clause was ambiguous and, therefore, not enforceable. It also held that the balance of convenience favoured Bucceri, given the potential impact on his livelihood and the complexity of the proceeding. The court noted that Bucceri had provided an undertaking to keep full accounting records, which addressed some of the concerns regarding the balance of convenience. Ultimately, the court concluded that a serious question to be tried existed, and the application for an interlocutory injunction was dismissed.

The court emphasised the need for clear and unambiguous terms in restraint of trade clauses to ensure their enforceability. It also highlighted the importance of considering the balance of convenience in interlocutory injunction applications, particularly when the livelihood of an individual is at stake. The court's decision underscored the importance of providing adequate security and undertakings in interlocutory injunction applications to address the concerns of both parties.