Non-competition clause void if activities and competitors not identified

Employment contract – Ancillary clauses
Non-competition clause null where the prohibition is too broad: the activities and competitors must be identified with precision
Tribunal of Foggia

A worker engaged as a helicopter pilot had entered into a non-competition clause with the company in connection with a training course for the attainment of a specific qualification. The agreement prohibited him, for five years after the end of the relationship, from working in competition in any form. Following his resignation, the worker sought restitution of the sums withheld as a penalty for breaching the clause; the company also claimed reimbursement of the training costs.
The Tribunal found the clause to be null and void. It did not identify with sufficient precision the prohibited activities or the competitors concerned. The generic reference to any competitive activity, extended to every possible form of work and for a very lengthy period, placed an excessive restriction on the worker’s professional freedom. The link to a specialist qualification was not sufficient: the restriction must allow the worker to understand, at the moment of signing, which activities remain precluded.
The company’s claim to recover the cost of the course was also dismissed. The training had already been provided and could not be returned; nor were the conditions for obtaining an equivalent sum satisfied.
The ruling reminds companies that a non-competition clause must define in concrete terms the prohibited activities, the territorial scope, and the duration. Formulations that are too broad expose the clause to nullity and may render irrecoverable the sums already paid.