Post-termination restraints
![](/export/sites/intelligence/goingglobal/images/country-flags/australia.png)
Australia
Those that protect the employer's legitimate business interests may be enforced to the extent reasonably necessary to protect those interests in all circumstances.
Non-competes
Typically no longer than 12 months, with some exceptions.
Customer non-solicits
Permissible.
Employee non-solicits
Permissible.
![](/export/sites/intelligence/goingglobal/images/country-flags/hong-kong.png)
Hong Kong, SAR
Those restraints that protect the employer's legitimate business interests may be enforced if reasonable. Garden leave is common for senior employees.
Non-competes
Typically no longer than 3 to 6 months.
Customer non-solicits
Permissible in limited circumstances. Typically no longer than 6 to 12 months.
Employee non-solicits
Permissible in limited circumstances. Typically no longer than 6 to 12 months.
![](/export/sites/intelligence/goingglobal/images/country-flags/india.png)
India
Non-competes
The Indian Contract Act 1872 provides that every agreement by which anyone is restrained from exercising a lawful profession, trade or business of any kind is void. Therefore, non-competition clauses which operate during the course of employment are generally not regarded as restraint of trade. However, post-termination non-competition clauses are void and unenforceable.
Customer non-solicits
Possibly enforceable. With post-termination non-dealing/non-solicit provisions, it may be argued that a restriction on activities with customers is a restraint of trade, if by complying the former employee is prejudicially affected from carrying out any trade. Whether such a clause is enforceable or not is, therefore, dependent on the facts of the case.
Non-solicitation provisions, even if they are upheld, generally only entitle the employer to damages, and it is highly uncommon for an Indian Court to grant an injunction preventing the customer from taking their business elsewhere. At best, a claim for damages may succeed against the employee for breach of their contractual agreement if the employer may show that the enforcement of the provision is essential to protect its confidential information and that the provision does not prejudice the former employee's ability to carry on a business or trade and therefore is not in restraint of trade.
Employee non-solicits
Where it is suspected that a non-dealing/non-solicitation covenant has been breached, a claim for damages may be made against the employee for breach of their contractual agreement if the employer can show that the enforcement of the provision would not prejudice the employee’s ability to carry on their business/trade. However, even if a non-solicitation provision is upheld, this will generally only entitle the employer to damages. It is unlikely that an Indian Court would grant an injunction preventing other employees from leaving and joining a rival firm.