There are limited situations where a reasonable non-competition agreement may be valid in California. Another example of inappropriate conditions is that the company operates in a particular niche in a particular market or sector. A non-compete clause should not take you away from an entire sector. In some sectors, it is customary for employers to require their employees to sign a non-compete contract. Essentially, a non-compete clause is a legal agreement that prevents a worker from working for his employer`s competitors after leaving the company. It is true that an employer cannot force you to sign one of these agreements, but they may be able to fire you if you have not signed or decide not to hire if you are a new employee. At the first hearing, the court may make a temporary decision to prevent you from doing an activity in question, or decide that what you are doing is correct for now. An injunction will only be effective until you return to court for a more complete, and generally longer process to finally decide the issue. Alternatively, your first hearing, depending on the facts of your case and the procedures of your state, may be the last hearing.
The court will hear evidence from you and your employer and decide whether you issue an order that prevents you from participating in the attacked activity or if you reject your employer application and allow you the freedom to continue the attacked activity. «Sufficient consideration» is a legal term that means that you, as a worker, must benefit from the signing of the contract. This may include acquiring a job (if you signed the non-compete clause as part of the employment contract) or maintaining the job for at least two years (if you only signed it after your already salaried job). Canadian courts will apply competition and non-appeal agreements, but the agreement must be limited, in time, scope and geographic scope, to what is reasonably necessary to protect the company`s property rights, such as confidential business information or customer relations and the scope of the agreement must be clearly defined. Shafron v. KRG Insurance Brokers (Western) Inc. 2009 CSC 6 of the Supreme Court of Canada found that a non-competition agreement was inconclusive because the term «Metropolitan City of Vancouver» was not definitively defined.  After a worker has violated the non-compete agreement and pays the employer non-winding compensation, the People`s Court supports this claim when the employer asks the worker to continue to fulfill the non-competitive obligations, as agreed.