Fitch v Dewes
A lifelong restraint on a solicitor's clerk was reasonable to protect the employer's clients in a small area.
Facts
Mr Fitch was a managing clerk employed by Mr Dewes, a solicitor in Tamworth. His contract provided that he would never, after leaving the employment, practise as a solicitor within seven miles of Tamworth Town Hall. He later qualified as a solicitor and proposed to set up practice in Tamworth. He sought a declaration that the covenant was unenforceable.
Legal principle
The House of Lords held that the covenant was enforceable. Although it was unlimited in time, it was reasonable to protect the solicitor's legitimate interest in his clients, because a managing clerk would come to know the clients well and could take them with him. The area was small, and the covenant only restrained Mr Fitch from practising as a solicitor in that area. A restraint of unlimited duration is not necessarily unreasonable; it depends on the interest to be protected.
Related cases on illegality and restraint of trade
- Archbolds (Freightage) Ltd v S Spanglett Ltd [1961] 1 QB 374
- Esso Petroleum Co Ltd v Harper's Garage (Stourport) Ltd [1968] AC 269
- Herbert Morris Ltd v Saxelby [1916] 1 AC 688
- Holman v Johnson (1775) 1 Cowp 341
- Les Laboratoires Servier v Apotex Inc [2014] UKSC 55, [2015] AC 430
- Re Mahmoud and Ispahani [1921] 2 KB 716
- Mason v Provident Clothing and Supply Co Ltd [1913] AC 724
- Nordenfelt v Maxim Nordenfelt Guns and Ammunition Co Ltd [1894] AC 535
Studying contract law? Our tutors help you understand and apply cases like this in essays, problem questions and exams. Request a quote or browse our law notes.
This summary is for study and revision and is not legal advice. Although our case summaries are checked for accuracy, we do not guarantee that they are free from errors or omissions. Always read the full judgment for the court's reasoning.
