Search a title or topic

Over 20 million podcasts, powered by 

Player FM logo
Artwork

Content provided by Onyx Capital Group. All podcast content including episodes, graphics, and podcast descriptions are uploaded and provided directly by Onyx Capital Group or their podcast platform partner. If you believe someone is using your copyrighted work without your permission, you can follow the process outlined here https://podcastplayer.com/legal.
Player FM - Podcast App
Go offline with the Player FM app!

The Non-Compete Case Everyone's Talking About: Dare vs Onyx | Industry & Leadership: Adam Solomon KC

35:55
 
Share
 

Manage episode 522616705 series 2660211
Content provided by Onyx Capital Group. All podcast content including episodes, graphics, and podcast descriptions are uploaded and provided directly by Onyx Capital Group or their podcast platform partner. If you believe someone is using your copyrighted work without your permission, you can follow the process outlined here https://podcastplayer.com/legal.

In this episode of Industry & Leadership, Onyx's CEO Greg Newman sits down with barrister Adam Solomon KC to unpack one of the most closely watched employment-law disputes in the commodities trading world.
The discussion centres on a highly unusual non-compete case involving illness during a year-long notice period, alleged competitive activity, and the complex interaction between medical evidence, confidential information, and restrictive covenants.
Adam explains why this case stood out: the courts were asked to decide whether a company could enforce 12 months of notice plus 12 months of non-compete, effectively keeping an employee out of the market for two years. The episode explores how judges approach questions of illness, memory-based knowledge, confidentiality, and the credibility of competing narratives.
Greg and Adam also examine the broader dynamics behind employer-versus-employer disputes, the strategic behaviour of legal teams, and the often-misunderstood role of conduct, regulatory issues, and aggressively obtained evidence in determining outcomes.
⏱️ Chapters
00:00 – Introduction & Case Background
01:27 – Illness, Notice Periods & Covenant Enforcement
02:20 – Why This Dispute Was Unusual
03:22 – What the Case Was Really About: Business vs Business
05:55 – Confidential Information, Memory & Non-Competes
07:45 – Judicial Reasoning & Technical Evidence
10:12 – Regulatory Concerns, Exchanges & Brokers
12:05 – Contrasting Outcomes: Why One Employee Won & One Lost
13:48 – Employer Conduct, Ethics & Evidence Gathering
20:55 – Strategy, Law Firm Tactics & Litigation Dynamics
27:00 – Broader Implications for Non-Competes & the Market
32:05 – Costs, Damages & What Would Have Happened on Appeal
35:06 – Final Thoughts & Closing Remarks
📲 Follow us:
Linktree: https://linktr.ee/flux_energy
YouTube: https://www.youtube.com/@UCmyBe-R7Do6ZGWLyaStSosg
LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/company/fluxinstitute
X (Twitter): https://x.com/FluxEnergyNews
Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/flux_energy_markets

  continue reading

305 episodes

Artwork
iconShare
 
Manage episode 522616705 series 2660211
Content provided by Onyx Capital Group. All podcast content including episodes, graphics, and podcast descriptions are uploaded and provided directly by Onyx Capital Group or their podcast platform partner. If you believe someone is using your copyrighted work without your permission, you can follow the process outlined here https://podcastplayer.com/legal.

In this episode of Industry & Leadership, Onyx's CEO Greg Newman sits down with barrister Adam Solomon KC to unpack one of the most closely watched employment-law disputes in the commodities trading world.
The discussion centres on a highly unusual non-compete case involving illness during a year-long notice period, alleged competitive activity, and the complex interaction between medical evidence, confidential information, and restrictive covenants.
Adam explains why this case stood out: the courts were asked to decide whether a company could enforce 12 months of notice plus 12 months of non-compete, effectively keeping an employee out of the market for two years. The episode explores how judges approach questions of illness, memory-based knowledge, confidentiality, and the credibility of competing narratives.
Greg and Adam also examine the broader dynamics behind employer-versus-employer disputes, the strategic behaviour of legal teams, and the often-misunderstood role of conduct, regulatory issues, and aggressively obtained evidence in determining outcomes.
⏱️ Chapters
00:00 – Introduction & Case Background
01:27 – Illness, Notice Periods & Covenant Enforcement
02:20 – Why This Dispute Was Unusual
03:22 – What the Case Was Really About: Business vs Business
05:55 – Confidential Information, Memory & Non-Competes
07:45 – Judicial Reasoning & Technical Evidence
10:12 – Regulatory Concerns, Exchanges & Brokers
12:05 – Contrasting Outcomes: Why One Employee Won & One Lost
13:48 – Employer Conduct, Ethics & Evidence Gathering
20:55 – Strategy, Law Firm Tactics & Litigation Dynamics
27:00 – Broader Implications for Non-Competes & the Market
32:05 – Costs, Damages & What Would Have Happened on Appeal
35:06 – Final Thoughts & Closing Remarks
📲 Follow us:
Linktree: https://linktr.ee/flux_energy
YouTube: https://www.youtube.com/@UCmyBe-R7Do6ZGWLyaStSosg
LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/company/fluxinstitute
X (Twitter): https://x.com/FluxEnergyNews
Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/flux_energy_markets

  continue reading

305 episodes

All episodes

×
 
Loading …

Welcome to Player FM!

Player FM is scanning the web for high-quality podcasts for you to enjoy right now. It's the best podcast app and works on Android, iPhone, and the web. Signup to sync subscriptions across devices.

 

Copyright 2025 | Privacy Policy | Terms of Service | | Copyright
Listen to this show while you explore
Play