It is true........ only party can not take the advantage of the other party under the shelter of precedents, because issues differ and the rule any such case apply to only such issues....
Actual damage to the employment of the individuals, and actual hindrance to the opportunities, yes agreed when the employee is no more connected with the company anymore and has dispatched his liabilities towards having towards the other party as agreed under the contract in accordance with the law........, but when he is connect with the company, and also has the liabilities towards the same in accordance with law, he is bound by the agreement.....
For example, A student who would complete his graduation in the very next year, Mr. Apple, join the company
Mrs. Orange which provides opportunity to work with it but on a condition that he must not leave Mrs. Orange for 3 years, is this an invalid, or against law ??
2) the same Mr. Apple gets apprenticeship for an year and and assurance of job opportunity on a condition that he would not leave Mrs. Orange for 3 years, is this illegal??
3) Mr. Mango, who is not a student, get employment opportunity with Mrs. Pumpkin, on a condition that he shall not leave Mrs. Pumpkin for 5 years, in which an year a training period, 6 months probation and upon satisfaction the employment...
4) The same, Mr. Mango get another employment "offer" with Mrs. Carrot, but on a condition that he shall not leave the company for 10years.....
5) Mr. chimp gets and employment 'offer', on a condition that he shall not leave the company for 15 years in which 3 years will be training, and 1 year for probation......
6) Mr. Chimp get another Offer on a condition that after working for 5 years as per the agreement with Mrs. Monkey, he shall not join any another company of a same sector for 2 years....
7) Mr. chimp get other offer on a condition that after leaving the company he shall not join 'any other company' for 1 year........
So, if you can identify which are the above are legal and difference between reasonable and unreasonable you would get the solution for the issue in question.........
Actual damage to the employment of the individuals, and actual hindrance to the opportunities, yes agreed when the employee is no more connected with the company anymore and has dispatched his liabilities towards having towards the other party as agreed under the contract in accordance with the law........, but when he is connect with the company, and also has the liabilities towards the same in accordance with law, he is bound by the agreement.....
For example, A student who would complete his graduation in the very next year, Mr. Apple, join the company
Mrs. Orange which provides opportunity to work with it but on a condition that he must not leave Mrs. Orange for 3 years, is this an invalid, or against law ??
2) the same Mr. Apple gets apprenticeship for an year and and assurance of job opportunity on a condition that he would not leave Mrs. Orange for 3 years, is this illegal??
3) Mr. Mango, who is not a student, get employment opportunity with Mrs. Pumpkin, on a condition that he shall not leave Mrs. Pumpkin for 5 years, in which an year a training period, 6 months probation and upon satisfaction the employment...
4) The same, Mr. Mango get another employment "offer" with Mrs. Carrot, but on a condition that he shall not leave the company for 10years.....
5) Mr. chimp gets and employment 'offer', on a condition that he shall not leave the company for 15 years in which 3 years will be training, and 1 year for probation......
6) Mr. Chimp get another Offer on a condition that after working for 5 years as per the agreement with Mrs. Monkey, he shall not join any another company of a same sector for 2 years....
7) Mr. chimp get other offer on a condition that after leaving the company he shall not join 'any other company' for 1 year........
So, if you can identify which are the above are legal and difference between reasonable and unreasonable you would get the solution for the issue in question.........