Search results
Results From The WOW.Com Content Network
Unlike disabling restraints, the effectiveness of the lawsuit does not prevent the transfer from being made. However, the Supreme Court says promissory restraints are not permissible. The promissory note discourages the person getting ready to sell the property which is the same effect as the disabling restraint. Forfeiture restraints
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 ...
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.
US law authorizing retaliation against violations of trade agreements Section 301 of the U.S. Trade Act of 1974 (Pub. L. 93–618, 19 U.S.C. § 2411, last amended March 23, 2018) authorizes the President to take all appropriate action, including tariff-based and non-tariff-based retaliation, to obtain the removal of any act, policy, or practice of a foreign government that violates an ...
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.
An alienation clause is common in mortgages, giving a mortgage lender the right to request full and immediate loan repayment when the home is sold or transferred.
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.
But North Carolina, along with five other states nationwide, still has laws on the books allowing a jilted partner to sue. The allegation of “alienation of affection” now faces NC House ...