Legislator Giurisprudenza & Legislazione
11 02 134 • KG LU 11 02 134 Generato dall'IA

Non-Compete Clause in Share Purchase Agreement Upheld Against Employment Law Challenge

Numero d'incarto 11 02 134
Autorità giudiziaria
Giurisdizione Svizzera · Canton Lucerna (CH-LU)
Data della decisione
Esito del giudizio Accolto (Allowed)
Spese processuali a carico del ricorrente / reclamante

Sintesi Legislator

Generato dall'IA

The case concerned an appeal against the granting of preliminary injunctive relief to enforce a non-compete clause stipulated in a share purchase agreement, rather than in a subsequent employment contract. The court reasoned that since the non-compete covenant arose from the sale of the company shares (Article 20 of the share purchase agreement), it was governed by sales law provisions (Articles 19 and 20 OR, and Articles 27/28 ZGB), not employment law provisions, rendering the appellant's arguments regarding the invalidity based on employment law inapplicable. Furthermore, the court found that the five-year, nationwide restriction did not constitute an excessive limitation of the appellant's economic freedom under Article 27 ZGB, especially considering the substantial proceeds from the sale and the pre-existing, long-term employment contract mitigating potential economic harm, thereby justifying the interim measures to prevent immediate harm to the acquired business.

Regesto Legislator

Generato dall'IA

Art. 292 StGB, Art. 340 OR, Art. 340a OR, Art. 27 Abs. 2 ZGB, Art. 340c Abs. 2 OR, Art. 337b OR; Non-Compete Clause in Share Purchase Agreement Upheld Against Employment Law Challenge: The court reasoned that since the non-compete covenant arose from the sale of the company shares (Article 20 of the share purchase agreement), it was governed by sales law provisions (Articles 19 and 20 OR, and Articles 27/28 ZGB), not employment law provisions, rendering the appellant's arguments regarding the invalidity based on employment law inapplicable. Furthermore, the court found that the five-year, nationwide restriction did not constitute an excessive limitation of the appellant's economic freedom under Article 27 ZGB, especially considering the substantial proceeds from the sale and the pre-existing, long-term employment contract mitigating potential economic harm, thereby justifying the interim measures to prevent immediate harm to the acquired business.

Parole chiave

Generato dall'IA
contratto di compravendita di azioni divieto di concorrenza libertà contrattuale diritto economico promessa di contrarre occupazione provvisoria

Disposizioni normative citate

Generato dall'IA

Giurisprudenza citata

Generato dall'IA
BGE 95 II 535
BGE 123 III 345
Generato dall'IA

Questioni giuridiche chiave estratte da Legislator

Generato dall'IA
Art. 27 ZGB

Cited in the reasoning to uphold the validity of the non-compete clause against the claim of excessive restriction of economic freedom.

Art. 19 OR

Cited in the reasoning as the legal basis for assessing the validity of the sales-law related non-compete agreement.

Ti chiedi come si applica questa sentenza alla tua fattispecie?

Analizza questa decisione insieme alla legislazione federale e cantonale, ai commentari e alla giurisprudenza successiva in Legislator AI.

Apri in Legislator →

Testo completo

Rechtsprechung Luzern

Instanz: · Obergericht

Abteilung: · I. Kammer

Rechtsgebiet: · Personenrecht

Entscheiddatum: · 09.12.2002

Fallnummer: · 11 02 134

LGVE: · 2002 I Nr. 4

Leitsatz: · Art 27 f. ZGB; Art 19 f. OR. Vorsorgliche Massnahmen zur Durchsetzung eines kaufrechtlichen Wettbewerbsverbotes.

Rechtskraft: · Diese Entscheidung ist rechtskräftig.