The WA Supreme Court has granted Robert Half an injunction restraining a former recruiter from contacting its clients, as part of an ongoing case against two ex-employees.
The court heard that recruiter John Colborne departed Robert Half in February and subsequently joined newly formed finance and accounting recruitment company Professional Search Group as a director.
Professional Search Group was also named as a party to the case, along with former Robert Half associate director Edward Cross, who is a director of the new company.
In early April, Robert Half sought an interim injunction against Colborne, restraining him from contacting its clients and candidates.
The company claimed that both Colborne and Cross had approached Robert Half clients and candidates, and submitted evidence of at least one candidate placed with an RHI client.
Robert Half argued Colborne had also breached the restraint of trade clause in his employment contract when he joined Professional Search Group.
Judge Janine Pritchard said Robert Half was not seeking an injunction that reflected the entire restraint clause – which it argued was intended to protect its confidential information and client connections.
Rather, the company had applied for an injunction preventing Colborne only from procuring its clients.
"The plaintiff says that would thereby prevent a risk of misuse of confidential information that [he] holds," Judge Pritchard said.
Restraint clause appears valid
Due to the urgency of the case, Judge Pritchard said Colborne's ability to defend the claims was restricted; however based on the "very limited" information available to her, the restraint clause appeared to be valid and "arguably" breached.
This established that there was a serious question to be tried, she said, and the balance of convenience also favoured an order restraining Colborne.
The judge said that while the injunction might affect Colborne's ability to earn a living, he would still be free to pursue recruitment opportunities outside finance and accounting, or with employers who were not Robert Half clients.
"Taking that balance of convenience consideration into account, together with the conclusion in relation to the validity of the restraint clause at this stage, and the evidence (albeit the limited evidence) of the breaches of the restraint clause that may have occurred, I am persuaded that this is an appropriate case for the granting of interim interlocutory relief."
The case will appear before the courts again tomorrow.
ROBERT HALF AUSTRALIA PTY LIMITED -v- CROSS [2013] WASC 137 (11 April 2013).