Rosenblatt
  • About
    • Memery Crystal
    • Investors
  • Services

    Services

    Rosenblatt is a disputes powerhouse. Competitive in the best sense, our teams provide incisive specialist expertise and collaborate closely with one another to meet our clients’ needs across the full spectrum of their activities.

    • Dispute Resolution
    • Construction, Engineering and Energy
    • Corporate Investigations
    • Debt Recovery
    • DLT, Digital Assets, and Tokenisation
    • Financial Crime
    • Financial Services
    • Insolvency & Financial Restructuring
    • International Arbitration
    • Probate & Wills
    • Serious & General Crime
    • Tax
    • Non-Contentious & Advisory
  • Insight
  • Events
  • Group Litigation
    • Amazon Legal Action
    • Property Investment Scheme Claims
    • Apple Class Action
  • Contact

The Government’s Consultation on Non-Compete Clauses

11th December 2020

Covid-19 has had an impact on many different aspects of our everyday lives, but there is one area that has been particularly hard-hit and that is the labour market. Thus in a bid to support the economic recovery following the impact of the pandemic, the Government has turned its attention to looking at ways to create better conditions for those seeking alternative employment or looking to pursue entrepreneurial ventures. This has led to the Department for Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy issuing a consultation paper on measures to reform post-termination restrictive covenants in employment contracts.

The paper states that the Government is “particularly interested in views on an option to make post-termination, non-compete clauses in contracts of employment enforceable only when the employer provides compensation during the term of the clause”. This is more akin to the position in the U.S and would mean that unless the employer agreed to remunerate the employee for the time during which the non-compete restriction is applicable and the employee is effectively kept out of the market, the non-compete clause would be unenforceable and the employee would be  free to pursue work in their current sector with competitors of their former employer or to set up in competition with their former employer following the termination of their employment, ultimately helping to boost the country’s economic recovery.

The Government is also exploring the option to introduce statutory restrictions on the period of non-compete clauses in employment contracts, which at present should be reasonable and no longer than necessary to protect the employer’s legitimate business interests. In well drafted employment contracts, the period of the non-compete restriction is usually shorter than for other post-termination restrictions relating to clients, customers, and staff. If adopted, this would provide a more consistent, uniform approach nationwide to the length of non-compete clauses, which are the most draconian form of post-termination restriction and the hardest to enforce, because most employers’ legitimate business interests such as confidentiality, client connections and stability of their workforce are adequately protected by post-termination confidentiality obligations, non-solicitation, non-dealing with clients, non-poaching and non-employment of employees’ post -termination restrictions.

The Government is seeking views on the implementation of transparent measures and communication between employers and employees in conjunction with remuneration. For example, employers would be required to disclose the exact terms of the non-compete post-termination restriction to employees in writing before they accept an offer of employment and enter employment relationships. This would mean that employees could make informed decisions about their ability to start their own business or join a competitor after their employment terminates, prior to commencing their employment.

Alternatively, the Government is also seeking opinions on whether non-compete post-termination restrictions in employment contracts should be rendered completely unenforceable. This would give employees even greater flexibility to pursue alternative employment immediately after their previous employment ended using their current skill set and could increase labour mobility and help the general economic recovery post-Covid. However, a complete ban on non-compete clauses is unlikely to be well received by employers because employers who have invested time and money in training their employees will not be given protection against their employees leaving the business as soon as they have completed their training and using their skills elsewhere in direct competition with their former employer.

The closing date for this consultation is 26 February 2021 and it will be interesting to see what subsequently unfolds. Our prediction is that in the current economic climate, employers are unlikely to be ordered to pay remuneration for the period of non-compete post-termination restrictions. As non-compete restrictions are difficult to enforce anyway, they are unlikely to be banned and employers will be keen to retain them, even if only for deterrent effect. However, it may well be the case that a statutory limit on the period for which post-termination non-compete clauses can be in place is introduced, particularly as employers should have well-drafted post-termination confidentiality obligations and other post-termination restrictions aimed at protecting their client connections and the stability of their workforce, hence rendering the importance or even need for post-termination non-compete clauses less significant.

In the meantime, and in any event, non-compete post-termination restrictions should be carefully drafted and tailored to the circumstances of the business and seniority level of employee concerned. They should be reviewed at regular intervals of the employment cycle. One size will not fit all, and may need to be amended with the employee’s written consent to take account of changing circumstances such as promotions and business needs.

Non-compete restrictions should only prevent an employee from competing in an area of the business in which they were directly involved or for which they had supervisory responsibility for a limited defined period prior to their termination date, rather than the U.S approach of listing competitors’ names whom an employee cannot join in any capacity in any event, even in a non-competing area of the organisation or in an area of the business in which they were not previously involved. The U.S approach would not be enforceable in the U.K. However, having said that many U.S businesses choose not to have any non-compete or even any post-termination restrictions at all in their employment contracts.

It’s worth bearing in mind that in the U.K, all restrictive covenants are void as a matter of public policy because they are in restraint of trade, unless they exist to protect the legitimate business interests of the employer and are no wider than is reasonably necessary to do so.

Post navigation

CMA Publishes Digital Markets Taskforce Advice to UK Government on the Design and Implementation of a New Regime for the Regulation of Digital Markets
Pension Investments | German Property Group | Rosenblatt’s Financial Crime Team

Categories

  • Articles
  • News
  • Videos

Topics

  • Banking & Finance
  • Competition & Regulatory
  • Corporate
  • Dispute Resolution
  • DLT, Cryptocurrencies and Crypto Assets
  • Employment
  • Financial Crime
  • Financial Services
  • Insolvency & Financial Restructuring
  • International Arbitration
  • Investigations
  • IP/Technology/Media
  • Real Estate
  • Tax
Rosenblatt
  • +44 (0) 20 7955 0880
  • info@rosenblatt-law.co.uk

Helpful Links

  • Anti-Modern Slavery Statement
  • Complaints Policy
  • Diversity & Equality
  • Interest
  • Pricing
  • Subscribe to our Mailing List

SRA No. 820215, authorised and regulated by the Solicitors Regulation Authority.

Ce Logo
Uk Top Tier Firm 2026

Rosenblatt is a trading name of RBG Legal Services Limited, a company registered in England and Wales (with company number 13287062) and which is authorised and regulated by the Solicitors Regulation Authority under SRA No. 820215. A list of the directors of RBG Legal Services Limited, together with a list of those persons who are designated as partners of Rosenblatt, is available for inspection at the registered office of the company at 165 Fleet Street, London EC4A 2DY.

Rosenblatt uses the word “partner” to refer to a senior employee or consultant. However, Rosenblatt is not a partnership and the use of the term “partner” does not create or imply a partnership amongst or between any of its employees or consultants.

© 2025 Rosenblatt

  • Privacy Policy
  • Cookie Policy
  • Terms & Conditions

Website by Brighter*IR

link

We are using cookies to give you the best experience on our website.

You can find out more about which cookies we are using or switch them off in .

Rosenblatt
Privacy Overview

This website uses cookies so that we can provide you with the best user experience possible. Cookie information is stored in your browser and performs functions such as recognising you when you return to our website and helping our team to understand which sections of the website you find most interesting and useful.

Strictly Necessary Cookies

Strictly Necessary Cookies should be enabled at all times so that we can save your preferences for cookie settings.

If you disable this cookie, we will not be able to save your preferences. This means that every time you visit this website you will need to enable or disable cookies again.

Performance cookies

These cookies allow us to count visits and traffic so we can measure and improve the performance of our site. They help us to know which pages are the most and least popular and see how visitors move around the site.

Please enable Strictly Necessary Cookies first so that we can save your preferences!

Cookie Policy

More information about our Cookie Policy.