Gammatek (Pty) Ltd v Lyttle (J1403/10) [2010] ZALCJHB 354 (11 July 2010)

Gammatek (Pty) Ltd v Lyttle (J1403/10) [2010] ZALCJHB 354 (11 July 2010)

The court found that the restraint of trade agreement was triggered by the termination of the fixed term contract and not by the respondent's subsequent indefinite employment. There was no evidence that the restraint agreement survived the termination of the fixed term contract or was incorporated into the indefinite contract. The wording of the agreement did not support the applicant's contention that it applied to any employment contract beyond the fixed term. Furthermore, the court held that a two-year restraint imposed on an employee expected to be employed for only six months was manifestly unreasonable. As a result, the applicant failed to establish a clear right to the relief...

Citation
[2010] ZALCJHB 354
Parties
Applicant: Gammatek (Pty) Ltd; Respondent: Patrick Lyttle
Court
Labour Court Johannesburg
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
11 July 2010
Case Number
J1403/10
Procedural Posture
Urgent Application / Application for Interdict
Outcome
Application dismissed with costs.
Judges
Van Niekerk
Legal Topics
Restraint of Trade, Employment Contract, Confidentiality Agreement
Labour Law Commercial and Corporate Restraint of Trade Employment Contract Confidentiality Agreement

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 2 Authorities cited 2 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Gammatek (Pty) Ltd

Applicant

Patrick Lyttle

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Urgent Application / Application for Interdict

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the restraint of trade agreement signed by the respondent is enforceable after the termination of the fixed term employment contract.
  2. 2 Whether the applicant has established a clear right to the relief sought under the restraint agreement.
  3. 3 Whether the restraint agreement applies to the subsequent indefinite employment contract.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the restraint of trade agreement was triggered by the termination of the fixed term contract and not by the respondent's subsequent indefinite employment. There was no evidence that the restraint agreement survived the termination of the fixed term contract or was incorporated into the indefinite contract. The wording of the agreement did not support the applicant's contention that it applied to any employment contract beyond the fixed term. Furthermore, the court held that a two-year restraint imposed on an employee expected to be employed for only six months was manifestly unreasonable. As a result, the applicant failed to establish a clear right to the relief...

Court Disposition

Application dismissed with costs.

Orders

  • The application is dismissed, with costs.