Mikeva Cash and Carry (Pty) Ltd and Another v Marx (J2720/17) [2017] ZALCJHB 463 (12 December 2017)

Mikeva Cash and Carry (Pty) Ltd and Another v Marx (J2720/17) [2017] ZALCJHB 463 (12 December 2017)

The court found that Marx breached the restraint of trade agreement by opening a new butchery close to Mikeva's premises, which was not covered by the ring-fenced exception in the Memorandum of Understanding. The reference to 'current interest in two retail stores' was interpreted as relating to the specific stores...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2017] ZALCJHB 463
Parties
Applicant: Mikeva Cash and Carry (Pty) Ltd; Applicant: Masscash (Pty) Ltd; Respondent: Jan Andre Marx
Court
Labour Court Johannesburg
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
12 December 2017
Case Number
J2720/17
Procedural Posture
Urgent Application / Application for Enforcement of Restraint of Trade
Outcome
Application granted in part; restraint enforced within Mossel Bay until 30 April 2019; costs apportioned.
Judges
Lagrange
Legal Topics
Restraint of Trade, Sale of Business, Enforcement of Employment Contract, Protectable Interest, Geographical Scope of Restraint
Labour Law Commercial and Corporate Restraint of Trade Sale of Business Enforcement of Employment Contract Protectable Interest Geographical Scope of Restraint

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

Parties

Mikeva Cash and Carry (Pty) Ltd

Applicant

Masscash (Pty) Ltd

Applicant

Jan Andre Marx

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Urgent Application / Application for Enforcement of Restraint of Trade

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Is the application to enforce the restraint of trade agreement urgent.
  2. 2 Did Marx breach the restraint of trade agreement by operating a new butchery close to Mikeva's premises.
  3. 3 Does the new Meat Spot butchery compete with Mikeva's business.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that Marx breached the restraint of trade agreement by opening a new butchery close to Mikeva's premises, which was not covered by the ring-fenced exception in the Memorandum of Understanding. The reference to 'current interest in two retail stores' was interpreted as relating to the specific stores existing at the time of the agreement, not any future location. The new store's activities were competitive with Mikeva's business, and Marx's knowledge of clients and goodwill acquired during his employment and sale of business were legitimate protectable interests. However, the court held that the geographical scope of the restraint (200 km) was unnecessarily wide and limited...

Court Disposition

Application granted in part; restraint enforced within Mossel Bay until 30 April 2019; costs apportioned.

Orders

  • The matter is heard as one of urgency and non-compliance with forms and service is condoned.
  • The respondent is interdicted and restrained until 30 April 2019 and within the municipal area Mossel Bay from engaging or obtaining business interests in Hyper Meats t/a The Meat Spot at 4 Mossel Street, Mossel Bay, or any business competitive with the first applicant.