The Co-operative had changed its rules to prevent any member from selling (except under heavy penalty) any milk produced by him in a large area of County Kerry to anyone except the Society, and a member could not terminate his membership without the Society’s permission. The plaintiff, who was a member, sought a declaration that the new rules were in unreasonable restraint of trade.
Held: There comes a point at which such a contract can come within the doctrine of restraint of trade. Lord Birkenhead LC found them unreasonable and void as being in restraint of trade.
Lord Finlay referred to Morris -v- Saxelby and said: ‘The present case is really governed by the principle there enunciated that ‘ public policy requires that every man shall be at liberty to work for himself and shall not be at liberty to deprive himself or the State of his labour, skill or talent, by any contract that he enters’ into’. This is equally applicable to the right to sell his goods.’
Judges:
Lord Birkenhead LC, Lord Atkinson, Lord Shaw, Lord Finlay
Citations:
[1919] AC 548
Jurisdiction:
England and Wales
Citing:
Cited – Herbert Morris Ltd v Saxelby HL 1916
For a covenant in restraint of trade to be treated as reasonable in the interests of the parties ‘it must afford no more than adequate protection to the benefit of the party in whose favour it is imposed.’ There is a need for the court to consider . .
Cited by:
Cited – Esso Petroleum Co Ltd v Harper’s Garage (Stourport) Ltd HL 1968
Agreement in Restraint of Trade Unenforceable
The defendant ran two garages under solus agreements with the plaintiffs who complained when the defendants began to purchase petrol from cheaper alternative sources. The House was asked whether the solus agreements were be regarded in law as an . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Contract
Updated: 14 May 2022; Ref: scu.259687
