Ad
related to: sample restraint of trade clause
Search results
Results From The WOW.Com Content Network
A restraint of trade is simply some kind of agreed provision that is designed to restrain another's trade. For example, in Nordenfelt v Maxim, Nordenfelt Guns and Ammunition Co ., [ 2 ] a Swedish arms inventor promised on sale of his business to an American gun maker that he "would not make guns or ammunition anywhere in the world, and would ...
Addyston Pipe and Steel Co. v. United States, 175 U.S. 211 (1899), was a United States Supreme Court case in which the Court held that for a restraint of trade to be lawful, it must be ancillary to the main purpose of a lawful contract. A naked restraint on trade is unlawful; it is not a defense that the restraint is reasonable.
Following Nordenfelt restraint of trade clauses were prima facie void at common law, but they may be deemed valid if three conditions are met: the terms seek to protect a legitimate interest; the terms are reasonable in scope from the viewpoint of the parties involved; the terms are reasonable in scope from the viewpoint of public policy.
The court found the restraint of trade clause was unreasonable, and modified it to excluding operating within 5 miles, for 3 years. Somers J said "The provisions of s 8 were intended to overcome the annihilating effect of the common law rules about excessive restraints and to alter those rules as to severance".
The court found that this was not true, but stated that not every "restraint of trade" in a literal sense could be unlawful. Just as under the common law, the restraint of trade had to be "unreasonable". In Chicago Board of Trade v. United States the Supreme Court found a "good" restraint of trade. [47]
Part of the sale agreement was that Leonard agreed to a restraint of trade, that meant he could not compete as a well driller anywhere in New Zealand, for the next 20 years. That was in 1968. Years later, Leonard decided to reenter the well drilling business with his sons. Robert tried to enforce the 20 years restraint of trade clause.
Reynolds' deal is reportedly an eight-year, $106.75 million contract that includes a modified no-trade clause and a club option in 2031. It's a record deal for the Pirates, ...
Mitchel v Reynolds (1711) 1 PWms 181 is decision in the history of the law of restraint of trade, handed down in 1711 in England.It is generally cited for establishing the principle that reasonable restraints of trade, unlike unreasonable restraints of trade, are permissible and therefore enforceable and not a basis for civil or criminal liability.