17. Our company was acquired by another company, and we are now told that we are subject to non-compete agreements. Can the new employer enforce the agreement against us? Labour advocates say their deployment has exploded. Russell Beck, a partner at Boston law firm Beck Reed Riden, which conducts an annually investigation into non-competitive litigation, said the latest data show that non-competitive and commercial complaints have tripled since 2000. A “bund, do not compete” (CNC), or non-competition, is governed by state law and not by federal law, and the general notion includes three aspects: Sometimes. Here too, depending on the facts of each case, the collaborators were able to assert legal rights for so-called “interferences of rtious with business relationships”. This right applies to cases where an employer has cost the worker a job for attempting to impose a non-compete agreement that is not legally applicable. Sometimes these “illegal interventions” can result in the worker being awarded significant damages for the employer`s excessive efforts to prevent the worker from finding another job. If a non-competition agreement is the same, a worker may be excluded or ousted from a new job by court decision. Even if this is never the case, the threat alone can have a deterrent effect that reduces wages for the entire labour force. Already in Dyer`s case in 1414, the English common law decided not to enforce the prohibitions on non-competition, as they were by nature trade restrictions.

[4] This prohibition remained unchanged until 1621, when a restriction limited to a given geographical site was established as an exception to the previously absolute rule. Nearly a hundred years later, the exception became the rule in Mitchel v Reynolds of 1711,[5] which provided the modern framework for analyzing the possibility of a non-competition clause. [6] Legally not, but this may indicate that the employer does not consider the costs and risk of attempting to enforce the agreement as a value. It may also be that the employer decided that the agreement was probably not applicable anyway. It is not a guarantee that the employer will not try to impose it in your case, unfortunately.