Decisions from the Arbitration Board for Inventions and Non-Compete Disputes

The Arbitration Board for inventions and non-compete disputes have ruled in two cases:

(I) The case concerned whether an employment position in a parent company violated a non-compete clause, even though only the operations of a subsidiary company competed with the former employer. The case also addressed the reasonableness of the non-compete clause and whether its duration should be adjusted. The employment with the parent company was deemed to violate the non-compete clause. However, the 12-month restriction period was found to be unreasonably long and was reduced to six months.

Read more here (in Swedish).

(II) The case concerned whether there were grounds for applying a non-compete clause to a business-to-business sales representative at a hardware store. The case also examined whether the claim was time-barred, as the company had not initiated consultations in accordance with the applicable collective agreement. The claim was not considered time-barred. However, the court found that there were not sufficient grounds to enforce a non-compete clause, considering, among other things, the employee’s position and the compensation offered during the restrictive period.

Read more here (in Swedish).