The Independent Liquor Group Distribution v Andrew Clement

In the case of The Independent Liquor Group Distribution v Andrew Clement, the plaintiff sought to enforce a restraint of trade clause contained within a contract of employment. The plaintiff, The Independent Liquor Group Distribution, sought interlocutory relief to enforce the restraint against the defendant, Andrew Clement, who had been employed by the plaintiff but had subsequently left to work for a competitor. The case was heard in the Supreme Court of New South Wales.

The legal issues before the court included whether the restraint of trade clause was a term of the defendant's employment, whether the first employment agreement continued to bind the defendant, and whether the restraint term was too wide. The court also needed to consider the balance of convenience and the issue of costs.

The court found that the restraint of trade clause was a term of the defendant's employment and that the first employment agreement continued to bind him. The court held that the restraint term was not too wide and that the balance of convenience favoured the plaintiff. The court also found that the defendant should bear the costs of the proceedings. The court granted the plaintiff's application for interlocutory relief and ordered the defendant to comply with the restraint of trade clause.

The court's decision was based on a detailed analysis of the terms of the employment agreement and the circumstances of the case. The court held that the restraint of trade clause was reasonable and enforceable and that the defendant had breached it by working for a competitor. The court also found that the plaintiff had demonstrated a strong likelihood of success at trial and that the balance of convenience favoured the grant of interlocutory relief. The court ordered the defendant to comply with the restraint of trade clause and to pay the plaintiff's costs of the proceedings.