Ballachulish Slate Quarries, Ltd v. Grant [1903] ScotLR 40_791 (10 July 1903)

Ballachulish Slate Quarries, Ltd v. Grant [1903] ScotLR 40_791 (10 July 1903)

The restraint was reasonable in scope and necessary to protect the pursuers' legitimate interest in securing competent medical attendance for their employees in a remote district. The defender voluntarily agreed to the restriction as a condition of employment, and the pursuers' interest to enforce it was not negated by subsequent events or by the wishes of the employees. The restriction was not contrary to public policy and was enforceable.

Citation
[1903] ScotLR 40_791
Parties
Pursuer: Ballachulish Slate Quarries, Limited; Defender: Lachlan Grant
Jurisdiction
Scotland
Judgment Date
10 July 1903
Procedural Posture
Civil / Appeal From Lord Ordinary to Inner House, With Petition for Interim Execution Pending Appeal to House of Lords
Outcome
Appeal dismissed; interlocutor of Lord Ordinary adhered to; interim execution allowed with extract superseded for two months to allow defender to make arrangements.
Legal Topics
Restraint of Trade, Enforceability of Restrictive Covenants, Public Policy in Contracts, Interest to Enforce Contract, Medical Employment Agreements
Contract Law Employment Law Restraint of Trade Enforceability of Restrictive Covenants Public Policy in Contracts Interest to Enforce Contract Medical Employment Agreements

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 3 Authorities cited 11 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Ballachulish Slate Quarries, Limited

Pursuer

Lachlan Grant

Defender

Procedural Posture

Civil / Appeal From Lord Ordinary to Inner House, With Petition for Interim Execution Pending Appeal to House of Lords

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether a contractual restraint preventing a medical practitioner from practising in a district after termination of employment is enforceable
  2. 2 Whether the employer has sufficient interest to enforce the restraint
  3. 3 Whether the restraint is contrary to public policy

Ratio Decidendi

The restraint was reasonable in scope and necessary to protect the pursuers' legitimate interest in securing competent medical attendance for their employees in a remote district. The defender voluntarily agreed to the restriction as a condition of employment, and the pursuers' interest to enforce it was not negated by subsequent events or by the wishes of the employees. The restriction was not contrary to public policy and was enforceable.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed; interlocutor of Lord Ordinary adhered to; interim execution allowed with extract superseded for two months to allow defender to make arrangements.

Orders

  • Declarator granted that defender is bound to discontinue practice as a doctor of medicine in Ballachulish district after termination of employment.
  • Interdict granted prohibiting defender from practising as a doctor in the district, particularly for pursuers' employees and their families.