Welcome to today’s Chamberlains Selection, where we will discuss with James d’Apice on the matter of Dundeon Pty Limited v Wills  NSWSC 15. We will talk about the infringement of an employment contract and the consequences associated in relation to the case.
DadCo sold its rent roll to P. P got to work collecting rent, employing DadCo’s former property manager, PM. P later made PM redundant. PM planned to take up employment with another estate agent, CousCo, 1.8km away performing the same role:  To add spice: PM’s dad was a director of DadCo and PM’s cousin was the sole director of CousCo. The relevant family name carried weight:  The employment contract between P and PM included restraints on her post-employment conduct:  P sought an injunction preventing PM from working for CousCo:  The Court had to consider (i) whether there was a serious question to be tried, and (ii) whether the balance of convenience favoured an injunction. As PM was the “human face” of P, it was seriously arguable that a 4 month restraint would be too short and that a non-compete was legitimate protection for P: ,  On balance of convenience, despite the hardship of being prevented from working within 5km PM was only paid a salary, meaning damages – rather than an injunction – would be fine:  P got up on balance of convenience and serious question to be tried. Injunctions granted:  to