Hard Hat Equipment Hire Pty Ltd v Mclean and Another (15214/2019) [2019] ZAGPJHC 215 (7 June 2019)

Hard Hat Equipment Hire Pty Ltd v Mclean and Another (15214/2019) [2019] ZAGPJHC 215 (7 June 2019)

The court found that the applicant had established protectable interests in confidential information and customer connections, which were threatened by the first respondent's employment with a direct competitor. The restraint of trade agreement was reasonable in both duration and geographic scope, covering only areas where the applicant operated or had customers. The applicant demonstrated urgency due to the limited period of the restraint and the risk of irreparable harm if relief was delayed. The respondent failed to prove that the restraint was unreasonable or contrary to public policy, and did not show that enforcement would render him economically inactive. The applicant was entitled...

Citation
[2019] ZAGPJHC 215
Parties
Applicant: Hard Hat Equipment Hire Pty Ltd; Respondent: George McLean; Respondent: Performance Plant Hire
Court
South Gauteng High Court, Johannesburg
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
7 June 2019
Case Number
15214/2019
Procedural Posture
Urgent Application / Final Interdict Application
Outcome
Application granted. The first respondent is interdicted and restrained for six months from specified competitive activities in designated provinces. Costs awarded jointly and severally against both respondents.
Judges
M B Mahalelo
Legal Topics
Restraint of Trade, Confidential Information, Protectable Interest, Enforceability of Contract, Urgent Interdict
Commercial and Corporate Civil Procedure Restraint of Trade Confidential Information Protectable Interest Enforceability of Contract Urgent 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 13 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Hard Hat Equipment Hire Pty Ltd

Applicant

George McLean

Respondent

Performance Plant Hire

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Urgent Application / Final Interdict Application

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the restraint of trade agreement between the applicant and first respondent is enforceable.
  2. 2 Whether the applicant has protectable interests justifying enforcement of the restraint.
  3. 3 Whether the restraint is reasonable in duration and geographic scope.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the applicant had established protectable interests in confidential information and customer connections, which were threatened by the first respondent's employment with a direct competitor. The restraint of trade agreement was reasonable in both duration and geographic scope, covering only areas where the applicant operated or had customers. The applicant demonstrated urgency due to the limited period of the restraint and the risk of irreparable harm if relief was delayed. The respondent failed to prove that the restraint was unreasonable or contrary to public policy, and did not show that enforcement would render him economically inactive. The applicant was entitled...

Court Disposition

Application granted. The first respondent is interdicted and restrained for six months from specified competitive activities in designated provinces. Costs awarded jointly and severally against both respondents.

Orders

  • The first respondent is interdicted and restrained for a period of six months (from 12 April 2019) in Gauteng, Mpumalanga, Limpopo, and North West from communicating with any supplier, customer, or potential customer of the applicant for the purpose of inducing them to contract with a competitor without written...
  • The first respondent is interdicted from directly or indirectly using or disclosing any information concerning the applicant unless legally required.