Planners tied up in restraint cases

recruitment/financial-planners/

2 April 2009
| By Liam Egan |
image
image image
expand image

Financial planners are facing the increased likelihood of restraint of trade provisions being imposed against them as their employers look to protect their client lists and revenue streams.

That is the bottom line assessment of workplace lawyers, with PricewaterhouseCoopers partner Neil Napper describing the growth in restraint cases by employers against employees as a “manifestation of broader commercial competition between competitors in the marketplace”.

“There’s always the risk for employers in a tough market that if their advisers can be attracted elsewhere, they could lose their protection of confidential information and, therefore, goodwill.

“One way to get traction in such a market is to get good people from competing players and to try to use their skill, knowledge and expertise to build up the business.”

Middletons partner Damian Sloan said the firm is experiencing a “greater emphasis on post employment restraints” in the advice sector, and not just at the “enforcement point”.

“Many organisations are now wanting to revisit the terms in their existing contracts with employees to try to ensure the contract doesn’t fall over in court because it’s unenforceable on its face,” Sloan said.

“I think there’s going to be more restraint cases, and as employers get better at documenting these contracts, it should follow that there will be more successful restraint cases.”

Sloan believes the growth in cases will be driven by increased poaching of staff among competitors, notably in the advice sector, as it is the “best way to grow business in tough times”.

“It’s a case of we know Joe Bloggs up the road has a great client base and a really good revenue stream, so let’s try and buy him to help us get through our crisis.”

Harmers Workplace Lawyers managing partner Joydeep Hor said “pursuing restraint cases is almost a de facto way of conducting recruitment among companies in a tough market”.

“A growing number of firms are deciding to defend the investment they’ve made in their staff, including pursuing restraint cases, because they can’t really afford for these people to leave,” Hor said.

“They’ve invested time, money and effort in their staff, and given that they can’t afford to spend on head-hunters to get new people, they are increasingly willing to pursue restraint cases as a warning to other staff.”

Read more about:

AUTHOR

Recommended for you

sub-bgsidebar subscription

Never miss the latest news and developments in wealth management industry

MARKET INSIGHTS

The succession dilemma is more than just a matter of commitments.This isn’t simply about younger vs. older advisers. It’...

1 week 6 days ago

Significant ethical issues there. If a relationship is in the process of breaking down then both parties are likely to b...

1 month 1 week ago

It's not licensees not putting them on, it's small businesses (that are licensed) that cannot afford to put them on. The...

1 month 2 weeks ago

AMP has settled on two court proceedings: one class action which affected superannuation members and a second regarding insurer policies. ...

6 days 5 hours ago

ASIC has released the results of the latest adviser exam, with August’s pass mark improving on the sitting from a year ago. ...

2 weeks 2 days ago

The inquiry into the collapse of Dixon Advisory and broader wealth management companies by the Senate economics references committee will not be re-adopted. ...

3 weeks 2 days ago

TOP PERFORMING FUNDS

ACS FIXED INT - AUSTRALIA/GLOBAL BOND
Powered by MOMENTUM MEDIA
moneymanagement logo