Landmark non-compete clause cases

The nature and extent to which a non-compete clause is legally allowed usually varies from one jurisdiction to another.

In our country, the Philippines, not only a few cases, some of which were promulgated as early as the 1920s, have dealt with problems and issues on the validity of “non-compete” or “non-involvement” stipulations, also known as Covenant Not to Compete (CNC) in employment contracts. For full appreciation of the principles affecting this particular kind of clause in our jurisdiction, it is highly suggested that the following cases be cited and read.

[1] G.R. No. L-4907 March 22, 1910

CARLOS GSELL, plaintiff-appellant, vs. PEDRO KOCH, defendant-appellee.

[2] G.R. No. L-10712 August 10, 1916

ANSELMO FERRAZZINI, plaintiff-appellee, vs. CARLOS GSELL, defendant-appellant.

[3] G.R. No. 13228 September 13, 1918

WILLIAM OLLENDORFF, plaintiff-appellee, vs. IRA ABRAHAMSON, defendant-appellant.

[4] G.R. No. L-13699 November 12, 1918

G. MARTINI (LTD.), plaintiff and appellant, vs. J. M. GLAISERMAN, defendant and appellee.[5] G.R. No. L-21127 February 9, 1924

ALFONSO DEL CASTILLO, plaintiff-appellant, vs. SHANNON RICHMOND, defendant-appellee.

[6] G.R. No. 145443. March 18, 2005

RAQUEL P. CONSULTA, petitioner, vs. COURT OF APPEALS, PAMANA PHILIPPINES, INC., RAZUL Z. REQUESTO, and ALETA TOLENTINO, respondents.

[7] G.R. No. 154060 August 16, 2005
YUSEN AIR AND SEA SERVICE PHILIPPINES, INCORPORATED, Petitioner, vs. ISAGANI A. VILLAMOR, Respondent.

[8] G.R. No. 163512 February 28, 2007

DAISY B. TIU, Petitioner vs. PLATINUM PLANS PHIL., INC., Respondent..

[9] G.R. No. 112940 November 21, 1994

DAI-CHI ELECTRONICS MANUFACTURING CORPORATION, petitioner, vs. HON. MARTIN S. VILLARAMA, JR., Presiding Judge, Regional Trial Court, Branch 156, Pasig, Metro Manila and ADONIS C. LIMJUCO, respondents.

[10] G.R. No. 196539 October 10, 2012

MARIETTA N. PORTILLO, Petitioner, vs. RUDOLF LIETZ, INC., RUDOLF LIETZ and COURT OF APPEALS Respondents.