The conditioning is sharp and clear. Is it justifiable? My answer is no.
The Absence of a Trade Secret
- The starting point of the discussion is thatAs we have seen A bonus company did not establish the existence of a trade secret Worthy of Protection in its activities. It has not proven the existence of a good business practiceIVA, or the sensitivity of a list of suppliers or customers.
No excess consideration was established for the agreement to the non-compete clause
- Even if the existence of a defensible trade secret has not been established, it is still possible that Mr. Zarrouk received a "special consideration" that was promised to him and that was provided to justify the restrictions on his freedom of occupation (Civil Appeal 3156/98 Ben Yishai v. Weingarten, PD 55(1( 939, 954 (1999( (hereinafter: Parashat Ben Yishai(). Indeed, a bonus company claimed in its summaries (paragraphs 90 and 95 of the summaries of the main claim), that the non-competition clause is justified, inter alia, also because "The Considerable Return" And ripe "Extreme conditions" which Mr. Zaruk received for his agreement not to compete.
However, this claim was not substantiated by evidence.
In Mr. Goldian's affidavits, there is no mention of the statement that in return for the non-compete stipulation, Mr. Zaruk received any consideration, such as an increase in the advances (see: paragraphs 37-39 of his first affidavit). Moreover, a comparison of the consideration of the first agreement, which did not include a non-compete clause, with the second agreement, which included such a clause, shows that the consideration did not change materially;
In the first agreement, it was noted that from January 2009 until June 2009, the amount paid to Mr. Zarrouk in advances was ILS 25, 000 gross (Appendix 2 to the statement of claim). The second agreement was signed on September 9, 2009, and accordingly the advances in the same amount continued until July 2010 (see Appendix 3 to the statement of claim; and also see paragraph 29 of Mr. Goldian's first affidavit and f, in which it was noted that the advances paid to him were ILS 24, 000 plus VAT per month until the end of 2008, ILS 25, 000 plus VAT from the beginning of 2009 until 2014. and ILS 30, 000 plus VAT during 2014 until Mr. Zaruk's departure in 2015).