A correspondence was attached between Happy and a contact on behalf of the customer PowerBet , who works with the plaintiff at the Ireland gambling site, who confirmed that the defendant contacted him and suggested that he engage with the defendant and verified that he had been working with the defendant since 7/22 (Appendix 16 to Machad's affidavit).
Also attached was a correspondence from a contact on behalf of the client Kwiff, with whom the plaintiff works at the gambling site in Ireland, who confirmed that the defendant had offered him to enter into an affiliation agreement with the defendant (Appendix 17 to the affidavit).
Another correspondence that was presented was from a contact of the client , TheClubHouse, who confirmed that he was working with the defendant from 6/22 to 7/22 (Appendix 18 to the affidavit).
A correspondence was also attached from the contact person on behalf of the client Conquestador with whom the plaintiff works at the Ireland betting site, who confirmed that the defendant had offered him to enter into an affiliation agreement with the defendant and that he had been working with the defendant since 8/22 (Appendix 19 to the affidavit).
If so, the defendant contacted the plaintiff's clients near the end of his employment with her.
- It follows from the aforesaid that the defendant violated clauses 7.1, 7.2, 7.4, and 7.6 of the employment agreement with the plaintiff.
- Testimonies showed that the plaintiff herself took 2 employees from a competing company. Indeed, this is a field in which employees move from one company to another, but this does not take lightly the transfer of trade secrets. An employee has the right to move from a company, but he did not have the right to contact customers from his former employer in the circumstances.
Has the duty of good faith been violated?
- According to the rulings of the National Court of Justice, senior employees have an increased duty of loyalty when they exploit confidential business information or business relationships of the employer for the benefit of a competing venture:
"In this conduct, the respondents violated the undertaking they had assumed in the employment contract not to engage with a supplier of the company at the end of their employment, and violated the duty of trust and good faith during the period of their employment, which is required by the performance of the contract, and which is an institutional element in the relationship between an employee and his employer.