South Africa Case Law

K2014266944 South Africa (Pty) Ltd t/a Hyperion Development v Govender (22420/2024)

K2014266944 South Africa (Pty) Ltd t/a Hyperion Development v Govender (22420/2024) [2025] ZAWCHC 225 (23 May 2025)

Court

Western Cape High Court, Cape Town

Case number

22420/2024

Judge

Mangcu-Lockwood

The court found that the applicant established a protectable interest in the form of trade secrets and goodwill, including confidential admissions strategies, pricing models, and student leads. The respondent, by virtue of his senior managerial position, had access to this information and was involved in strategic planning and relationship cultivation central to the applicant's business. Project Y was found to be a competitor as defined in the restraint agreement, with sufficient overlap in business activities. The respondent's association with Project Y, regardless of whether services were p…

Source excerpt

• Restraint Of Trade
• Protectable Interest
• Confidential Information
• Trade Secrets
• Enforcement Of Employment Contract
• Final Interdict

MSA Outsourcing Solutions (Pty) Ltd v Strydom and Others (J850/2024)

MSA Outsourcing Solutions (Pty) Ltd v Strydom and Others (J850/2024) [2025] ZALCJHB 196 (22 May 2025)

Court

Labour Court Johannesburg

Case number

J850/2024

Judge

M. P. Kumalo

The Labour Court dismissed an urgent restraint-enforcement application, finding the respondents were low-level employees with no proved access to protectable confidential information or customer connections.

• Restraint Of Trade
• Confidential Information
• Urgent Interdict
• Protectable Interest
• Customer Connections
• Restraint-of-trade

Eazi Access Rental (Pty) Ltd v Suleman and Another (2025/009793)

Eazi Access Rental (Pty) Ltd v Suleman and Another (2025/009793) [2025] ZALCJHB 192 (12 May 2025)

Court

Labour Court Johannesburg

Case number

2025/009793

Judge

G Mafa-Chali

The Court found that the Applicant established a protectable interest in its confidential information and customer connections, which the First Respondent had access to during his employment. The First Respondent's employment with the Second Respondent, a direct competitor, created a reasonable apprehension of harm to the Applicant's business interests. The restraint of trade agreement was reasonable in duration (12 months) and geographical scope (South Africa), and the First Respondent did not discharge the onus to prove unreasonableness or that enforcement would be contrary to public policy…

Source excerpt

• Restraint Of Trade
• Confidential Information
• Protectable Interest
• Urgent Interdict
• Employment Contract
• Customer Connections

Backsports (Pty) Ltd v Motlhanke and Another (Application for Leave to Appeal) (2025/009346)

Backsports (Pty) Ltd v Motlhanke and Another (Application for Leave to Appeal) (2025/009346) [2025] ZALCJHB 118 (28 March 2025)

Court

Labour Court Johannesburg

Case number

2025/009346

Judge

M Makhura

The Labour Court dismissed an unopposed application for leave to appeal after finding no reasonable prospects of success in a restraint-of-trade dispute.

• Restraint Of Trade
• Protectable Interest
• Leave To Appeal
• Jurisdiction
• Employment Relationship
• Leave-to-appeal

Torrente and Another v Grant Monaghan and Associates Incorporated (Ammended) (JA 45/23;JA 25/23)

Torrente and Another v Grant Monaghan and Associates Incorporated (Ammended) (JA 45/23;JA 25/23) [2025] ZALAC 5 (29 January 2025)

Court

Labour Appeal Court

Case number

JA 45/23;JA 25/23

Judges

Waglay, Mlambo, Davis

The Court found that the respondent had established a legitimate protectable interest in its relationships with patients, referring doctors, and confidential business information. The appellant's conduct during her employment, including soliciting patients and submitting claims under her new practice, demonstrated a risk of unfair competition and justified the enforcement of the restraint. The Court held that the restraint was reasonable in both duration and geographical scope, as it was limited to one year and a 27-kilometre radius from the respondent's premises. The order struck a fair bala…

Source excerpt

• Restraint Of Trade
• Protectable Interest
• Employment Contract
• Confidential Information
• Public Policy
• Pacta Sunt Servanda

Claire Kourie Physiotherapists Inc v Nyimba (120605/2024)

Claire Kourie Physiotherapists Inc v Nyimba (120605/2024) [2025] ZAGPPHC 62 (27 January 2025)

Court

North Gauteng High Court, Pretoria

Case number

120605/2024

Judge

MP Kumalo

Urgent restraint-of-trade interdict refused because the applicant failed to show urgency or a protectable interest threatened by the former employee.

• Restraint Of Trade
• Employment Contract
• Urgent Interdict
• Protectable Interest
• Garden Leave
• Restraint-of-trade

Umhlanga Rehabilitation Centre v Sewram (D3438/2024)

Umhlanga Rehabilitation Centre v Sewram (D3438/2024) [2025] ZAKZDHC 1; (2025) 46 ILJ 1044 (KZD) (14 January 2025)

Court

Kwazulu-Natal High Court, Durban

Case number

D3438/2024

Judge

Bond AJ

The court found that clause 15 of the employment agreement was so vague and lacking in definition that it could not support the relief sought by the applicant. The clause failed to specify the commencement date, the meaning of the eight-kilometre restriction, the interests to be protected, or the scope of the restraint. The applicant did not establish any primary facts demonstrating a protectable interest, such as confidential information or trade connections, nor did the respondent have sufficient personal knowledge or influence over the applicant's clientele. The respondent's short period o…

Source excerpt

• Restraint Of Trade
• Protectable Interest
• Contractual Interpretation
• Enforcement Of Employment Terms

SMD Technologies (Pty) Ltd v Tavares and Another (118592/24)

SMD Technologies (Pty) Ltd v Tavares and Another (118592/24) [2024] ZALCJHB 546 (13 December 2024)

Court

Labour Court Johannesburg

Case number

118592/24

Judge

Baloyi

The court found that the applicant established a clear right to enforce the restraint of trade agreement, as the first respondent had access to confidential information and trade connections, and her employment with a direct competitor posed a real risk to the applicant's interests. The first respondent failed to discharge the onus of proving that the restraint was unreasonable in duration or territorial scope, nor did she demonstrate that enforcement would render her economically inactive or unproductive. The court held that public policy and constitutional considerations did not outweigh th…

Source excerpt

• Restraint Of Trade
• Confidential Information
• Protectable Interest
• Enforceability Of Contract
• Balance Of Convenience

Select PPE (Pty) Ltd v Holmes and Another (2024/115703)

Select PPE (Pty) Ltd v Holmes and Another (2024/115703) [2024] ZALCJHB 484 (3 December 2024)

Court

Labour Court Johannesburg

Case number

2024/115703

Judge

S Snyman

The court found that USP is not a competitor of SPPE, as USP is a manufacturer selling PPE to retailers and not to end-user customers, while SPPE is a retailer. SPPE failed to provide credible evidence that USP had expanded into retail or was competing for SPPE's customers. Applying the Plascon Evans rule, the version of USP's CEO was preferred. Holmes's employment at USP does not breach the restraint of trade covenant, as there is no competition or similarity in business. SPPE did not establish a protectable interest in trade connections, as Holmes had no customer relationships or influence.…

Source excerpt

• Restraint Of Trade
• Confidential Information
• Interdict Requirements
• Employment Contracts
• Protectable Interest

Candi and Company (Pty) Ltd v Rhode and Others (24820/2024)

Candi and Company (Pty) Ltd v Rhode and Others (24820/2024) [2024] ZAWCHC 437 (28 November 2024)

Court

Western Cape High Court, Cape Town

Case number

24820/2024

Judge

Van Den Berg

The court partly enforced a restraint dispute, rejecting the broad 12-month, 10-kilometre restraint but interdicting the respondents from soliciting the applicant's clients.

• Restraint Of Trade
• Protectable Interest
• Unlawful Competition
• Interdict
• Employment Contracts
• Restraint-of-trade