Artwork

内容由Innangard提供。所有播客内容(包括剧集、图形和播客描述)均由 Innangard 或其播客平台合作伙伴直接上传和提供。如果您认为有人在未经您许可的情况下使用您的受版权保护的作品,您可以按照此处概述的流程进行操作https://zh.player.fm/legal
Player FM -播客应用
使用Player FM应用程序离线!

The Use and Enforceability of Post-Termination Restrictions (PTRs) in the Employment Relationship

41:30
 
分享
 

Manage episode 347858419 series 3103261
内容由Innangard提供。所有播客内容(包括剧集、图形和播客描述)均由 Innangard 或其播客平台合作伙伴直接上传和提供。如果您认为有人在未经您许可的情况下使用您的受版权保护的作品,您可以按照此处概述的流程进行操作https://zh.player.fm/legal
We are delighted to share Innangard’s podcast on the use and enforceability of post-termination restrictions (“PTRs”) in the employment relationship. In this episode, Ulf Goeke of Seitz in Germany, Regan O’Driscoll of CC Solicitors in Ireland, Jef Michielsen of Bellaw in Belgium, Merrill April and Naomi Latham of CM Murray LLP, discuss the following: Whether employers tend to pay employees to keep them out of the market for the duration of their PTRs and if so, does such a duty arise from case law or statute? The UK’s Government consultation on potentially reforming the use of non-competes and how this position differs elsewhere in the world. Are directors and partners/LLP members treated differently when it comes to enforcing PTRs, and is it common for their PTRs to be lengthier or more restrictive in comparison to employees? How employers approach PTRs more generally, particularly in respect of inserting PTRs into contracts of employment, enforcing them once the employment relationship ends and whether the courts approach differs in any way. Whether there are specific elements of a PTR, such as its geographical scope, which employers commonly include and/or are challenged by employees. Similarly, whether the use of anti-team move provisions are commonly used in respective jurisdictions. If you would like to find out more about the matters discussed in this podcast, please contact any one of the panellists or visit the Innangard website, LinkedIn or Twitter account for more information and contact details.
  continue reading

16集单集

Artwork
icon分享
 
Manage episode 347858419 series 3103261
内容由Innangard提供。所有播客内容(包括剧集、图形和播客描述)均由 Innangard 或其播客平台合作伙伴直接上传和提供。如果您认为有人在未经您许可的情况下使用您的受版权保护的作品,您可以按照此处概述的流程进行操作https://zh.player.fm/legal
We are delighted to share Innangard’s podcast on the use and enforceability of post-termination restrictions (“PTRs”) in the employment relationship. In this episode, Ulf Goeke of Seitz in Germany, Regan O’Driscoll of CC Solicitors in Ireland, Jef Michielsen of Bellaw in Belgium, Merrill April and Naomi Latham of CM Murray LLP, discuss the following: Whether employers tend to pay employees to keep them out of the market for the duration of their PTRs and if so, does such a duty arise from case law or statute? The UK’s Government consultation on potentially reforming the use of non-competes and how this position differs elsewhere in the world. Are directors and partners/LLP members treated differently when it comes to enforcing PTRs, and is it common for their PTRs to be lengthier or more restrictive in comparison to employees? How employers approach PTRs more generally, particularly in respect of inserting PTRs into contracts of employment, enforcing them once the employment relationship ends and whether the courts approach differs in any way. Whether there are specific elements of a PTR, such as its geographical scope, which employers commonly include and/or are challenged by employees. Similarly, whether the use of anti-team move provisions are commonly used in respective jurisdictions. If you would like to find out more about the matters discussed in this podcast, please contact any one of the panellists or visit the Innangard website, LinkedIn or Twitter account for more information and contact details.
  continue reading

16集单集

所有剧集

×
 
Loading …

欢迎使用Player FM

Player FM正在网上搜索高质量的播客,以便您现在享受。它是最好的播客应用程序,适用于安卓、iPhone和网络。注册以跨设备同步订阅。

 

快速参考指南

边探索边听这个节目
播放