Share on LinkedInShare on LinkedIn

ARTICLE · 12 DECEMBER 2024

Legal Precedent On Restrictive Covenants In Employment Agreements—A Case Study

Bennett Jones LLP
Bennett Jones LLP
Contributor
Bennett Jones LLP

Bennett Jones LLP

Bennett Jones is one of Canada’s premier business law firms. With deep experience in complex...

View firm profile
Explore more from Bennett Jones LLP

A recent Alberta Court of King's Bench decision, People Corporation v Quinn et al. (2024 ABKB 711), offers valuable insights into how courts balance the enforceability of restrictive covenants, employee rights.

CanadaEmployment and HR

Employee restrictive covenants are often a contentious issue, especially when employees leave to form (or join) competing firms.

A recent Alberta Court of King's Bench decision, People Corporation v Quinn et al. (2024 ABKB 711), offers valuable insights into how courts balance the enforceability of restrictive covenants, employee rights, and employer interests. This case revolves around allegations of breach of restrictive covenants and the legal intricacies involved in assessing their validity.

Case Background

The case stems from People Corporation's share acquisition of Lane Quinn Benefit Consultants Ltd. (LQBC). As part of the acquisition, Jay Quinn, LQBC's majority shareholder and CEO, signed an Executive Employment Agreement (EEA) and a Restrictive Covenants Agreement (RCA). Mr. Quinn later resigned from People Corporation to establish a competing firm, Quinn Advisory Group (QAG), and subsequently hired three former LQBC employees.

We operate a free-to-view policy, asking only that you register in order to read all of our content. Please login or register to view the rest of this article.

The content of this article is intended to provide a general guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought about your specific circumstances.

See more popular content from