Diedre Steyn Physiotherapy Inc v Stander (440/2020) [2020] ZAECPEHC 14 (9 June 2020)

Diedre Steyn Physiotherapy Inc v Stander (440/2020) [2020] ZAECPEHC 14 (9 June 2020)

The court found that the applicant had established a proprietary interest worthy of protection, specifically in the form of goodwill and customer connections with referring doctors at St George's Hospital. The respondent, through her employment, developed relationships with these doctors and was in a position to exploit those connections for her own benefit. The risk to the applicant's customer connections justified enforcement of the restraint agreement. The restraint was found to be reasonable, as it did not render the respondent economically inactive or unproductive; she remained free to practice at other hospitals in Port Elizabeth. The relief sought was limited to restraining the...

Citation
[2020] ZAECPEHC 14
Parties
Applicant: Deidre Steyn Physiotherapy Inc; Respondent: Marlene Stander
Court
Eastern Cape High Court, Port Elizabeth
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
9 June 2020
Case Number
440/2020
Procedural Posture
Urgent Application / Final Interdict Application
Outcome
Application granted in part; restraint of trade enforced against respondent for specified period and location; costs awarded to applicant.
Judges
N Gqamana
Legal Topics
Restraint of Trade, Employment Contract, Protectable Interest, Customer Connections, Final Interdict
Commercial and Corporate Labour Law Restraint of Trade Employment Contract Protectable Interest Customer Connections Final Interdict

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 5 Authorities cited 15 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Deidre Steyn Physiotherapy Inc

Applicant

Marlene Stander

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Urgent Application / Final Interdict Application

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the restraint of trade agreement between the applicant and respondent is enforceable.
  2. 2 Whether the applicant has a protectable proprietary interest justifying enforcement of the restraint.
  3. 3 Whether the restraint is reasonable and not contrary to public policy.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the applicant had established a proprietary interest worthy of protection, specifically in the form of goodwill and customer connections with referring doctors at St George's Hospital. The respondent, through her employment, developed relationships with these doctors and was in a position to exploit those connections for her own benefit. The risk to the applicant's customer connections justified enforcement of the restraint agreement. The restraint was found to be reasonable, as it did not render the respondent economically inactive or unproductive; she remained free to practice at other hospitals in Port Elizabeth. The relief sought was limited to restraining the...

Court Disposition

Application granted in part; restraint of trade enforced against respondent for specified period and location; costs awarded to applicant.

Orders

  • The respondent is interdicted and restrained for a period of 9 months from 1 October 2019 to 30 June 2020 from conducting or being employed by any physiotherapy practice or any business or practice which renders physiotherapy services within St George's Hospital in Port Elizabeth.
  • The respondent is ordered to pay the costs of this application, including the costs of two counsel.