In the case of Peters & Co Limited v. Ward it was determined that Ward, after giving notice, had downloaded his client list and taken boxes of documents from the office. The Plaintiff sued for breach of restrictive covenants and sought an Anton Piller Order. What did the Court hold?
A) The covenant was enforced, but the Anton Piller Order was not granted.
B) The covenant was enforced because it was reasonable and the Anton Piller Order was granted.
C) The covenant was void because such provisions are in restraint of trade and therefore automatically illegal.
D) The covenant was unenforceable because it was not under seal.
E) The covenant was unenforceable because such covenants demand independent legal advice prior to execution and none was obtained.
Correct Answer:
Verified
Q16: Which of the following statements more accurately
Q17: Which of the following is not one
Q18: Which of the following would end the
Q19: In which of the following situations will
Q20: Drew got a non-union, senior-management-level job. After
Q22: Which of the following statements is correct
Q23: Vanessa had been a waitress at Joe's
Q24: Which one of the following statements is
Q25: Jeff had worked for Sweetums Candy Shoppe
Q26: Which of the following statements is false
Unlock this Answer For Free Now!
View this answer and more for free by performing one of the following actions
Scan the QR code to install the App and get 2 free unlocks
Unlock quizzes for free by uploading documents