UK: Employment Legal Update: Tactics for Team Moves

Last Updated: 13 May 2010
Article by Nicholas Robertson, Bernadette Daley and Christopher Fisher

Originally published May 13, 2010

Keywords: Tullett Prebon, BGC Brokers, constructive dismissal, conspiracy, breach of contract, no poaching injunction

Now that the dust has settled on the keenly awaited judgment in Tullett Prebon Plc v BGC Brokers LP this update focuses on key points from the decision and lessons to be learned. In the wake of this case, prospective employers may take a more cautious approach when carrying out a 'raiding' exercise on a competitor. At the end of the alert, we have included recommendations for 'poachers and gamekeepers' involved in team moves.

POACHERS AND GAMEKEEPERS – TACTICS FOR TEAM MOVES

The case may be well-known to readers as it has attracted fairly extensive media coverage. The case is a complex one, involving a number of issues, so we have focussed in this update on the issues most likely to be of interest to readers.

THE FACTS

The main parties, BGC Brokers LP (BGC) and Tullett Prebon Plc (Tullet), were rival inter-dealer brokers. BGC recruited Tony Verrier, former COO of Tullett. Shortly after joining, Mr Verrier embarked upon a campaign to recruit brokers from Tullett. He persuaded 13 brokers to sign "forward contracts" providing that they would join BGC as soon as they were free to do so. Three subsequently changed their minds. Significant signing payments were offered to all 13 and indemnities provided in respect of losses caused by them leaving Tullett.

When Tullett learned of the plans afoot, it arranged whiteboard presentations for various brokers some of whom had been approached by BGC, promoting Tullett's business and outlining the risks of joining BGC. Tullett also noted that it would take legal action against the individuals. Tullett later suspended Mr Hall, a desk manager, who they believed was acting as a recruiting sergeant for BGC. Within short succession, the remaining 9 brokers (the Defendant Brokers) resigned, on instructions from Mr Verrier, claiming they had been constructively dismissed in light of the whiteboard presentations and Mr Hall's treatment when he was suspended.

Tullett commenced proceedings against BGC, Mr Verrier, Mr Lynn, Mr Hall and the Defendant Brokers claiming, amongst other things, conspiracy and inducing breach of contract and seeking injunctive relief. The Court granted a "no poaching" injunction preventing BGC from approaching any UK-based Tullett employee (whether lawfully or unlawfully) pending trial. Undertakings were also given including that Tullet would treat the brokers as being on garden leave until trial. By the time judgment was given, those undertakings had been in place for almost 12 months. At trial, Tullett sought an injunction to prevent the Defendant Brokers working for BGC until October 2010, which would have amounted to an injunction of 18 months, and damages. BGC counterclaimed against Tullett for inducing three brokers to change their minds and breach the contracts entered into with BGC.

KEY POINTS FROM THE DECISION

1. Constructive Dismissal

Wise to the fact that all too often arguments of repudiatory breach are constructed by employees seeking to avoid "notice periods and irksome covenants", the Court held that the Defendant Brokers had not been constructively dismissed and that Mr Hall had relied on manufactured grounds.

Despite the fact that the whiteboard presentations had been attended by "a formidable team" of Tullett's senior management and members of its legal department, the Court held that, rather than being designed to destroy the relationship of trust and confidence between it and the Defendant Brokers, they were intended to strengthen it.

2. Conspiracy and Inducing Breach of Contract

The Court accepted that it was BGC's intention to injure Tullett by recruiting its employees to advance its own business, even if that was not its dominant intention or purpose. It was sufficient that BGC intended (by unlawful means) to injure its rival's business as a means to an end.

3. Injunctions

Encouragingly for employers in Tullett's position, the Court found that it was not unreasonable to have a non-compete restrictive covenant with no garden leave off-set. However, lack of an off-set was a factor to consider in determining whether to uphold a covenant, and if so, for how long.

It also held that non-compete covenants are not unreasonable where non-solicitation and non-dealing covenants may be difficult to enforce. A six month non-compete period was reasonable given the importance of broker/trader relationships.

Weighing up all of this, the Court deemed that 9 of the 10 brokers should not be kept out of the market for any longer than 12 months (a period that was shortly due to expire). For the remaining broker, a period of 8 months was justified.

In terms of the no poaching injunction granted pending trial, that would continue for another 14 days only. Although Tullet argued this injunction should be extended, the Court held that the potential destabilisation of its workforce was no longer a significant factor as the Defendant Brokers had been on garden leave for almost 12 months.

4. Breach of 'Forward Contracts'

The Court found that Tullett had not induced the three brokers who changed their mind to breach their contracts with BGC. BGC had itself breached the relationship of trust and confidence with those brokers before the employment relationship had even started due to its "cynical disregard for the law and for employees' duties throughout the recruitment exercise." They were therefore induced to breach contracts they were entitled to end in any event due to BGC's conduct, so BGC suffered no loss.

5. Repayment of Retention Payments and Loyalty Bonuses

Tullett sought repayment of retention payments paid to the Defendant Brokers, which were stated to be repayable if notice was given during the fixed-term of the contract, and bonuses, 25% of which were attributable to past performance and 75% to loyalty. Under the relevant provision, they were entitled to retain one-sixth of the bonus for each complete month worked after payment date.

BGC argued that Tullett's claim for repayment amounted to an unlawful restraint of trade. The Court disagreed as the repayment provision did not affect the brokers' ability to work after they left employment; they were substantial sums paid to highly paid employees as a reward for loyalty.

The Court also held that the repayment provision was not a penalty as it was not a sum payable in the event of a breach of contract. The sums claimed by Tullett were repayable on any departure, not just one in breach of contract. The Judge was also plainly influenced by the fact that the brokers were "intelligent, successful men capable of driving a bargain with Tullett and the law should not look for ways for them to avoid the provisions of their contracts."

IMPACT

It is clear that the High Court disapproved of the conduct of the Defendants in this case. It was keen to strike a balance between the right of employees to move from one employer to another and the strong public interest in ensuring that employees who are handsomely remunerated should be held to covenants into which they entered freely.

On the face of it, BGC got off relatively lightly in that, 14 days after judgment was delivered, the brokers were free to go and work for them. However, one of the reasons the Court did not extend the periods of restriction was that it was conscious that the adverse publicity the case had attracted ought to act as a deterrent to BGC acting in the same way again.

The trial was limited to issues of liability and injunctive relief. There will be a further hearing to resolve the matter of damages (if it cannot be agreed between the parties). Tullett will argue that significant damage was caused to their business and given the apparently dim view the Court took of BGC's conduct, the damages award may be substantial.

RECOMMENDATIONS

This case contains many useful learning points for those involved in team moves as well as some warnings as to the potential pitfalls involved.

Tips for Gamekeepers:

  • Consider including a provision in contracts for senior/valued employees that they must inform you if they receive an approach from a rival. This would provide a valuable opportunity to consider whether or not there was a wish to retain the services of the employee in question. The Court held that such a provision in the contract of a senior employee would not amount to a restraint of trade as the employee could decide whether or not to move.
  • Include a clause in the contract which requires an employee to show his contract to a prospective employer so that that employer is aware of the restrictive covenants. That is likely to make it easier to get a claim for inducing breach of contract off the ground.
  • If an employee is required to repay a bonus within a certain period of payment if he leaves/gives notice, consider specifying that a significant proportion of the bonus relates to loyalty. That seemed to be influential in the Court's decision that the bonus clause did not amount to a restraint of trade.
  • If seeking to persuade employees to stay, be careful not to stray into behaviour that would constitute constructive dismissal. Tullett's whiteboard presentation did not cross the line. However, the Court was influenced by the "strength of character" of the brokers. In a case of "shrinking violets" (as the Court put it), this might not have been so.
  • Consider at an early stage what evidence is available to prove the allegations. In this case, orders for delivery up of blackberries were sought but as the Judge recorded, "it was Mr Verrier's gambit to "lose" blackberries whenever he thought they might contain inconvenient material". Nevertheless, the Court was able to establish a pattern of communication amongst the Defendants by examining telephone records.

Tips for Poachers:

  • Do not assume that ignorance of the terms of an employee's contract is a defence. Being indifferent can be sufficient to satisfy the test for inducing a breach of contract.
  • If offering an employee an indemnity in respect of legal costs and financial losses suffered as a result of leaving the current employer, this will usually be on the condition that the recruiting employer can direct the employee's conduct. Although this is the most practical way of the indemnity working, it could increase the likelihood of a finding that the poacher induced a breach of contract by the employee. The other drawback of offering an indemnity is that it arguably makes the employee more likely to breach his/her contract.
  • If using a desk head (or similar level of employee) as a recruiting sergeant, bear in mind the view in this case that a desk head is under a plain legal duty to act in the best interests of his employer and to report a proposed poaching raid by a competitor (even though that may appear to be in conflict with the obligations he feels he owes the members of his team). He would then be under an obligation to follow his employer's instructions to prevent that raid happening.
  • Remember that it may be a breach of duty for an employee to provide information to a competitor to further a recruitment exercise, which the employee knows would assist the competitor and harm his/her employer, even if that information is not confidential.
  • Do not forget that actions can amount to a breach of trust and confidence even before an individual has started employment – e.g. the way in which the recruitment exercise has been conducted.
  • Bear in mind that relevant communications by mobile or blackberry may be disclosable (and even the records for those devices may have to be disclosed).

Learn more about our Employment practice.

Visit us at www.mayerbrown.com.

Mayer Brown is a global legal services organization comprising legal practices that are separate entities ("Mayer Brown Practices"). The Mayer Brown Practices are: Mayer Brown LLP, a limited liability partnership established in the United States; Mayer Brown International LLP, a limited liability partnership incorporated in England and Wales; and JSM, a Hong Kong partnership, and its associated entities in Asia. The Mayer Brown Practices are known as Mayer Brown JSM in Asia.

This Mayer Brown article provides information and comments on legal issues and developments of interest. The foregoing is not a comprehensive treatment of the subject matter covered and is not intended to provide legal advice. Readers should seek specific legal advice before taking any action with respect to the matters discussed herein.

Copyright 2010. Mayer Brown LLP, Mayer Brown International LLP, and/or JSM. All rights reserved.

To print this article, all you need is to be registered on Mondaq.com.

Click to Login as an existing user or Register so you can print this article.

Authors
 
In association with
Related Video
Up-coming Events Search
Tools
Print
Font Size:
Translation
Channels
Mondaq on Twitter
 
Register for Access and our Free Biweekly Alert for
This service is completely free. Access 250,000 archived articles from 100+ countries and get a personalised email twice a week covering developments (and yes, our lawyers like to think you’ve read our Disclaimer).
 
Email Address
Company Name
Password
Confirm Password
Position
Mondaq Topics -- Select your Interests
 Accounting
 Anti-trust
 Commercial
 Compliance
 Consumer
 Criminal
 Employment
 Energy
 Environment
 Family
 Finance
 Government
 Healthcare
 Immigration
 Insolvency
 Insurance
 International
 IP
 Law Performance
 Law Practice
 Litigation
 Media & IT
 Privacy
 Real Estate
 Strategy
 Tax
 Technology
 Transport
 Wealth Mgt
Regions
Africa
Asia
Asia Pacific
Australasia
Canada
Caribbean
Europe
European Union
Latin America
Middle East
U.K.
United States
Worldwide Updates
Check to state you have read and
agree to our Terms and Conditions

Terms & Conditions and Privacy Statement

Mondaq.com (the Website) is owned and managed by Mondaq Ltd and as a user you are granted a non-exclusive, revocable license to access the Website under its terms and conditions of use. Your use of the Website constitutes your agreement to the following terms and conditions of use. Mondaq Ltd may terminate your use of the Website if you are in breach of these terms and conditions or if Mondaq Ltd decides to terminate your license of use for whatever reason.

Use of www.mondaq.com

You may use the Website but are required to register as a user if you wish to read the full text of the content and articles available (the Content). You may not modify, publish, transmit, transfer or sell, reproduce, create derivative works from, distribute, perform, link, display, or in any way exploit any of the Content, in whole or in part, except as expressly permitted in these terms & conditions or with the prior written consent of Mondaq Ltd. You may not use electronic or other means to extract details or information about Mondaq.com’s content, users or contributors in order to offer them any services or products which compete directly or indirectly with Mondaq Ltd’s services and products.

Disclaimer

Mondaq Ltd and/or its respective suppliers make no representations about the suitability of the information contained in the documents and related graphics published on this server for any purpose. All such documents and related graphics are provided "as is" without warranty of any kind. Mondaq Ltd and/or its respective suppliers hereby disclaim all warranties and conditions with regard to this information, including all implied warranties and conditions of merchantability, fitness for a particular purpose, title and non-infringement. In no event shall Mondaq Ltd and/or its respective suppliers be liable for any special, indirect or consequential damages or any damages whatsoever resulting from loss of use, data or profits, whether in an action of contract, negligence or other tortious action, arising out of or in connection with the use or performance of information available from this server.

The documents and related graphics published on this server could include technical inaccuracies or typographical errors. Changes are periodically added to the information herein. Mondaq Ltd and/or its respective suppliers may make improvements and/or changes in the product(s) and/or the program(s) described herein at any time.

Registration

Mondaq Ltd requires you to register and provide information that personally identifies you, including what sort of information you are interested in, for three primary purposes:

  • To allow you to personalize the Mondaq websites you are visiting.
  • To enable features such as password reminder, newsletter alerts, email a colleague, and linking from Mondaq (and its affiliate sites) to your website.
  • To produce demographic feedback for our information providers who provide information free for your use.

Mondaq (and its affiliate sites) do not sell or provide your details to third parties other than information providers. The reason we provide our information providers with this information is so that they can measure the response their articles are receiving and provide you with information about their products and services.

If you do not want us to provide your name and email address you may opt out by clicking here .

If you do not wish to receive any future announcements of products and services offered by Mondaq by clicking here .

Information Collection and Use

We require site users to register with Mondaq (and its affiliate sites) to view the free information on the site. We also collect information from our users at several different points on the websites: this is so that we can customise the sites according to individual usage, provide 'session-aware' functionality, and ensure that content is acquired and developed appropriately. This gives us an overall picture of our user profiles, which in turn shows to our Editorial Contributors the type of person they are reaching by posting articles on Mondaq (and its affiliate sites) – meaning more free content for registered users.

We are only able to provide the material on the Mondaq (and its affiliate sites) site free to site visitors because we can pass on information about the pages that users are viewing and the personal information users provide to us (e.g. email addresses) to reputable contributing firms such as law firms who author those pages. We do not sell or rent information to anyone else other than the authors of those pages, who may change from time to time. Should you wish us not to disclose your details to any of these parties, please tick the box above or tick the box marked "Opt out of Registration Information Disclosure" on the Your Profile page. We and our author organisations may only contact you via email or other means if you allow us to do so. Users can opt out of contact when they register on the site, or send an email to unsubscribe@mondaq.com with “no disclosure” in the subject heading

Mondaq News Alerts

In order to receive Mondaq News Alerts, users have to complete a separate registration form. This is a personalised service where users choose regions and topics of interest and we send it only to those users who have requested it. Users can stop receiving these Alerts by going to the Mondaq News Alerts page and deselecting all interest areas. In the same way users can amend their personal preferences to add or remove subject areas.

Cookies

A cookie is a small text file written to a user’s hard drive that contains an identifying user number. The cookies do not contain any personal information about users. We use the cookie so users do not have to log in every time they use the service and the cookie will automatically expire if you do not visit the Mondaq website (or its affiliate sites) for 12 months. We also use the cookie to personalise a user's experience of the site (for example to show information specific to a user's region). As the Mondaq sites are fully personalised and cookies are essential to its core technology the site will function unpredictably with browsers that do not support cookies - or where cookies are disabled (in these circumstances we advise you to attempt to locate the information you require elsewhere on the web). However if you are concerned about the presence of a Mondaq cookie on your machine you can also choose to expire the cookie immediately (remove it) by selecting the 'Log Off' menu option as the last thing you do when you use the site.

Some of our business partners may use cookies on our site (for example, advertisers). However, we have no access to or control over these cookies and we are not aware of any at present that do so.

Log Files

We use IP addresses to analyse trends, administer the site, track movement, and gather broad demographic information for aggregate use. IP addresses are not linked to personally identifiable information.

Links

This web site contains links to other sites. Please be aware that Mondaq (or its affiliate sites) are not responsible for the privacy practices of such other sites. We encourage our users to be aware when they leave our site and to read the privacy statements of these third party sites. This privacy statement applies solely to information collected by this Web site.

Surveys & Contests

From time-to-time our site requests information from users via surveys or contests. Participation in these surveys or contests is completely voluntary and the user therefore has a choice whether or not to disclose any information requested. Information requested may include contact information (such as name and delivery address), and demographic information (such as postcode, age level). Contact information will be used to notify the winners and award prizes. Survey information will be used for purposes of monitoring or improving the functionality of the site.

Mail-A-Friend

If a user elects to use our referral service for informing a friend about our site, we ask them for the friend’s name and email address. Mondaq stores this information and may contact the friend to invite them to register with Mondaq, but they will not be contacted more than once. The friend may contact Mondaq to request the removal of this information from our database.

Security

This website takes every reasonable precaution to protect our users’ information. When users submit sensitive information via the website, your information is protected using firewalls and other security technology. If you have any questions about the security at our website, you can send an email to webmaster@mondaq.com.

Correcting/Updating Personal Information

If a user’s personally identifiable information changes (such as postcode), or if a user no longer desires our service, we will endeavour to provide a way to correct, update or remove that user’s personal data provided to us. This can usually be done at the “Your Profile” page or by sending an email to EditorialAdvisor@mondaq.com.

Notification of Changes

If we decide to change our Terms & Conditions or Privacy Policy, we will post those changes on our site so our users are always aware of what information we collect, how we use it, and under what circumstances, if any, we disclose it. If at any point we decide to use personally identifiable information in a manner different from that stated at the time it was collected, we will notify users by way of an email. Users will have a choice as to whether or not we use their information in this different manner. We will use information in accordance with the privacy policy under which the information was collected.

How to contact Mondaq

You can contact us with comments or queries at enquiries@mondaq.com.

If for some reason you believe Mondaq Ltd. has not adhered to these principles, please notify us by e-mail at problems@mondaq.com and we will use commercially reasonable efforts to determine and correct the problem promptly.