K.N. Umlah Insurance Agency Ltd. v. Christie

K.N. Umlah Insurance Agency Ltd. v. Christie

Clause 6(iv) is unenforceable because it was introduced after the employment agreement without fresh consideration and, alternatively, is an unreasonable covenant in restraint of trade (overbroad in geographic scope and excessive in duration); the commission claim fails because the payment was a prior settlement not...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
2009 NSSM 7
Parties
Claimant: K. N. Umlah Insurance Agency Ltd; Defendant: M. J. Christie
Court
Nova Scotia Small Claims Court
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
4 March 2009
Procedural Posture
Employer V. Employee Debt Claim (training Repayment and Commission) / Adjudication in Small Claims Court After Transfer From Supreme Court; Hearing and Decision Rendered
Outcome
Claim dismissed in its entirety; clause 6(iv) held unenforceable; commission claim dismissed; defendant awarded costs of transfer and costs incurred in Supreme Court prior to transfer subject to assessment/agreement.
Legal Topics
Enforceability of Post Employment Repayment Clause, Consideration for Contract Amendment, Duress, Penalty Clause, Commission Dispute, Costs of Transfer
Source Language
english
Contract Law Employment Law Restraint of Trade Civil Procedure Small Claims Enforceability of Post Employment Repayment Clause Consideration for Contract Amendment Duress Penalty Clause +2 more

Source-derived case record

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Legal principles 4 Authorities cited 7 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

K. N. Umlah Insurance Agency Ltd

Claimant

M. J. Christie

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Employer V. Employee Debt Claim (training Repayment and Commission) / Adjudication in Small Claims Court After Transfer From Supreme Court; Hearing and Decision Rendered

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether clause 6(iv) requiring repayment of training costs is binding
  2. 2 Whether the amendment containing clause 6(iv) was supported by consideration
  3. 3 Whether the clause was procured by duress

Ratio Decidendi

Clause 6(iv) is unenforceable because it was introduced after the employment agreement without fresh consideration and, alternatively, is an unreasonable covenant in restraint of trade (overbroad in geographic scope and excessive in duration); the commission claim fails because the payment was a prior settlement not captured by the May 2004 amendment; accordingly the claimant's claim is dismissed.

Court Disposition

Claim dismissed in its entirety; clause 6(iv) held unenforceable; commission claim dismissed; defendant awarded costs of transfer and costs incurred in Supreme Court prior to transfer subject to assessment/agreement.

Orders

  • Claim dismissed in its entirety.
  • Clause 6(iv) of the employment contract declared unenforceable against the defendant.