In the recent case of Dwyer (UK Franchising) Limited v Fredbar Limited and ano’r [2022] EWCA Civ 889, the Court of Appeal considered the reasonableness of restrictive covenants in a franchise agreement.
In the recent case of Dwyer (UK Franchising) Limited v Fredbar Limited and ano’r [2022] EWCA Civ 889, the Court of Appeal considered the reasonableness of restrictive covenants in a franchise agreement.
In this case, the franchisor operated the largest emergency plumbing company in the country with more than 30 franchises. The franchisee was an individual who had no previous experience in the plumbing and drainage business but invested his savings in the business and borrowed money from the bank. During pre-contract negotiations, the franchisor thought that the franchisee was an unsuitable candidate but opted to give him a chance. The franchisee paid the franchise fee and began trading in January 2019. The business was, however, much less profitable than had been indicated by the franchisor’s projections and so the franchisee tried to sell the franchise but was unsuccessful. The franchisee therefore tried to terminate the agreement and started a competing business within the franchise territory. The franchisor issued a claim. At first instance, the judge held that the franchisee had committed a repudiatory breach of the agreement but the covenants were unenforceable because they were wider than was reasonably required.
The Court of Appeal confirmed that an inequality of bargaining power between the franchisor and franchisee is a significant factor when determining the reasonableness of the covenants. Where there is significant inequality of bargaining power between the parties, a franchise agreement is more akin to a contract of employment than to a contract for the sale of a business. The Court of Appeal also found that, when assessing the reasonableness of the covenants, the degree of risk undertaken by the franchisee and their personal circumstances were also factors that the court is entitled to consider. When finding that the 12-month restraint was unreasonable, the Court highlighted the need to distinguish between the position in the event of early termination and the position if the franchise had been running for the full period or a substantial portion of it, suggesting a sliding scale of restrictions as a method of promoting reasonableness.
In addition to franchise agreements, this judgment is likely to have wider implications in relation to the reasonableness of covenants in commercial contracts (such as shareholders’ agreements) and in employment contracts. The restrictive covenants will need to be carefully drafted to take into account the parties’ specific circumstances including their respective bargaining power, the financial/personal impact upon the covenantor during the period of the restrictions and whether a sliding scale should be used. If not properly drafted then the covenantor risks the covenants themselves being deemed unreasonable and inadvertently losing any protection.
In this session, we examined the legal framework around grant funded collaborations and discussed the key risks to be aware of, including IP ownership and compliance with grant terms.
Official statistics show that 15,336 claims which included a complaint of age discrimination were received at the Employment Tribunals between March 2020 and March 2021.
The outcome of the Employment Tribunal claim brought by Gulnaz Raja against Starling Bank Limited (1) (Starling), and Matthew Newman (2) was reported last month.
In the Autumn Statement delivered on 17 November, rises to the National Living Wage and National Minimum Wage rates were announced, to take effect from 1 April 2023.
The World Cup kicks off in Qatar on Sunday 20 November 2022, with the final taking place on Sunday 18 December 2022. Undoubtedly, this is a huge sporting event, and many employees will be keen to show their support for their favourite teams. However, due to the time difference, start times for the matches are between 10 a.m. and 7 p.m. UK time, which could have an impact on employers if employees who wish to watch the matches are scheduled to work.
Settlement agreements are commonplace in an employment context and are ordinarily used to provide the parties to the agreement with certainty following the conclusion of an employment relationship.
National law firm Browne Jacobson has advised long standing retail client, Wilko on the sale and leaseback of its Nottinghamshire distribution centre in Worksop to logistics specialist DHL for £48m.
Claims arising from interest-only mortgages have been farmed in volume. Many such claims to date have sought to drive a narrative that interest-only mortgages are an inherently toxic product and brokers were negligent simply for suggesting them. Taylor is a helpful recalibration, focussing instead on what the monies raised by the mortgage product were being used for and whether the client understood the inherent risks.
Where an employee appeals against their dismissal under a contractual appeal procedure and their appeal is successful, reinstatement to their previous role is automatic and does not require approval or agreement from the employee.
Settlement agreements in an employment context are ordinarily used to provide both parties with certainty following the conclusion of an employment relationship – but what happens when there is alleged discrimination after entering into a settlement agreement?
In a judgment handed down yesterday the Supreme Court has affirmed that a so called “creditor duty” exists for directors such that in some circumstances company directors are required to act in accordance with, or to consider the interests of creditors. Those circumstances potentially arise when a company is insolvent or where there is a “probability” of an insolvency. We explore below the “trigger” for such a test to apply and its implications.
Created at the end of the Brexit transition period, Retained EU Law is a category of domestic law that consists of EU-derived legislation retained in our domestic legal framework by the European Union (Withdrawal) Act 2018. This was never intended to be a permanent arrangement as parliament promised to deal with retained EU law through the Retained EU Law (Revocation and Reform) Bill (the “Bill”).
Practice Direction 57AC (“PD57AC”) relates to witness evidence in trials and explicitly applies only to the Business and Property Courts. It applies to existing proceedings in which the witness statements for trial are signed on or after 6 April 2021.
A few weeks ago we brought you news that following the Government’s mini-budget it was confirmed that the off-payroll working rules (known as “IR35”) put in place for public and private sector businesses from 2017 and 2021 would be scrapped from April 2023.
