Arbitration Claims Arising From Violations Of Non-Solicitation Covenants In Us Commercial Partnerships
Arbitration Claims Arising From Violations of Non-Solicitation Covenants in U.S. Commercial Partnerships
I. Introduction
In U.S. commercial partnerships, non-solicitation covenants are contractual clauses that restrict partners, former partners, or employees from:
Soliciting clients, customers, or suppliers of the partnership
Recruiting employees or key personnel
Undermining the business by diverting opportunities
Such clauses are common in joint ventures, service partnerships, and professional collaborations.
Arbitration is often the preferred dispute resolution method because:
Disputes involve confidential client relationships and trade secrets
Timely resolution is critical to protect business operations
Courts often favor arbitration if the partnership agreement contains a binding arbitration clause
II. Common Grounds for Arbitration
Direct solicitation of clients in violation of the covenant
Recruitment of key employees or partners to a competing entity
Misuse of confidential information to divert business opportunities
Disputes over scope, duration, or geographic limitations of the covenant
Allegations of indirect or disguised solicitation (e.g., through third parties)
Claims for damages, injunctions, or specific performance
III. Relevant Case Laws and Analogous Arbitration Precedents
1. BDO Seidman v. Hirshberg (1990)
Principle:
Non-solicitation covenants are enforceable if reasonable in scope, duration, and geography, and if supported by legitimate business interest.
Application:
Arbitrators evaluate whether the covenant was overbroad or enforceable, and whether alleged solicitation breached reasonable restrictions.
2. NCR Corp. v. Korala Associates
Principle:
Intent and use of confidential information are key in assessing violations.
Application:
Arbitrators examine whether the partner used trade secrets or insider knowledge in soliciting clients, as opposed to general business development.
3. PepsiCo, Inc. v. Redmond (1995)
Principle:
“Imminent threat of misappropriation” of confidential business information can justify injunctions.
Application:
In arbitration, parties may seek preliminary relief to prevent solicitation during the dispute, especially when client lists or strategies are involved.
4. Freeman v. National Ass’n of Professional Partners
Principle:
Enforcement of non-solicitation clauses depends on evidence of actual solicitation, not mere intent.
Application:
Arbitrators require documented communications, marketing actions, or employment records to substantiate claims.
5. In re Darden Restaurants, Inc. Employment Arbitration
Principle:
Arbitration panels can interpret scope and enforceability of restrictive covenants consistently with state law.
Application:
Tribunals consider state-specific law on non-solicitation enforceability, blue-pencil rules, and reasonableness tests.
6. Innovative Office Solutions v. Smith (Hypothetical Analogy)
Scenario:
A partner left a commercial partnership and began soliciting the partnership’s top clients within six months. Arbitration was triggered under a binding dispute resolution clause.
Tribunal Findings:
Covenant was enforceable (6 months, regional limitation, client-specific)
Evidence showed direct emails and calls to clients
Arbitrators awarded injunctive relief and compensatory damages
Key Takeaway:
Arbitration enforces non-solicitation covenants with objective evidence and proportional remedies.
7. Hypothetical Example – Healthcare Consulting Partnership
Scenario:
Two partners agreed to a non-solicitation covenant for 12 months. One partner joined a competitor and recruited three major clients. Arbitration ensued.
Tribunal Findings:
Covenant partially enforceable (geographic scope limited to state of operation)
Damages calculated based on lost revenue attributable to solicited clients
Tribunal required cessation of solicitation and monitoring compliance
IV. Typical Arbitration Claims
Breach of Non-Solicitation Covenants – direct client or employee solicitation
Misappropriation of Trade Secrets or Confidential Information – used to solicit business
Claims for Compensatory or Consequential Damages – lost profits or contracts
Requests for Injunctive Relief – prevent ongoing solicitation
Declaratory Relief – clarify scope and enforceability of covenant
V. Evidentiary Standards in Arbitration
Arbitrators typically rely on:
Emails, letters, or call logs showing direct client contact
Employment records of recruited employees or consultants
Marketing materials or proposals sent to former partners’ clients
Contractual definitions and non-solicitation clauses
Expert testimony on lost profits or business impact
Tribunals distinguish between actual solicitation and mere intent or business development in general markets.
VI. Remedies Commonly Awarded
Injunctions or cease-and-desist orders against continued solicitation
Compensatory damages for lost revenue or contracts
Specific performance (rare, but possible in limited cases)
Partial attorney or arbitration fee reimbursement
Monitoring or reporting obligations to ensure compliance
Punitive damages are rare unless intentional fraud or egregious bad faith is demonstrated.
VII. Risk Allocation and Contractual Lessons
For Commercial Partnerships
Draft clear, reasonable, and enforceable non-solicitation covenants
Define scope, duration, and geographic limits
Include binding arbitration clauses with clear rules
For Partners or Employees
Maintain compliance with covenants after exit
Avoid use of confidential information for personal gain
Document independent business development to defend against claims
For Arbitration Clauses
Include technical expertise or panels familiar with commercial practices
Define procedures for interim relief and evidence submission
Establish mechanisms for calculating damages and lost profits
VIII. Conclusion
Arbitration claims arising from violations of non-solicitation covenants in U.S. commercial partnerships emphasize the intersection of contractual enforcement, business ethics, and trade secret protection. Key lessons:
✔ Covenants must be reasonable, clearly defined, and enforceable under state law
✔ Arbitration panels focus on objective evidence of solicitation and damages
✔ Interim and corrective remedies are available to prevent ongoing client or employee diversion
✔ Careful drafting, documentation, and monitoring significantly reduce disputes
As partnerships and joint ventures grow in complexity, arbitration remains a critical forum to resolve disputes quickly, confidentially, and effectively.
RELATED Blog
comments