Restrictive Covenants After a Sale

What a seller can be stopped from doing next — and why over-wide drafting protects nobody.

A buyer paying for goodwill is paying for customer relationships, reputation, staff and market position — all of which can leave with the seller. A seller who sells on Friday and opens a competing business on Monday has sold considerably less than the buyer paid for. Covenants are how that value is protected.

The Four Covenants, and How Enforceability Is Judged

Usually four, and each deserves separate attention rather than acceptance as a block. Non-competition — not carrying on a competing business, within a defined area, for a defined period. Non-solicitation of customers — not approaching or dealing with customers of the business sold. Non-solicitation of employees — not poaching the staff who transferred with it. And confidentiality, which as to genuine trade secrets frequently continues indefinitely. As to enforceability, the broad principle is that a restraint must go no further than is reasonably necessary to protect a legitimate interest. On a business sale the buyer plainly has such an interest in the goodwill they paid for, so the question becomes whether the particular restraint is reasonable in duration, geographic extent and range of activities, judged against that interest. Covenants given by a seller on a sale are generally regarded more favourably than employment covenants, because the parties dealt at arm’s length and the seller was paid for the goodwill. It remains a question of degree on the facts rather than a formula, and it is one of the areas where general assumptions are least reliable.

Why Buyers Should Draft Narrowly, and What Sellers Should Watch

The temptation for a buyer is to take the widest possible restriction — every activity, the whole country, an indefinite period — on the instinct that more is safer. The opposite is true. A restraint going beyond what is reasonably necessary risks being unenforceable, and a buyer holding an unenforceable covenant has no protection whatever at the moment they need it. A narrow, carefully drawn covenant that genuinely protects the goodwill acquired is worth considerably more than a sweeping one that may be worth nothing when tested. Buyers should draft for enforceability rather than for ambition. Sellers, meanwhile, should watch three things. Scope creep — covenants drafted so broadly that they prevent working in your own industry at all, which for someone selling at fifty rather than retiring is a constraint on the rest of a working life. Duration, which should be proportionate to how long the goodwill genuinely needs protection. And the interaction with any consultancy or employment arrangement after completion: a seller staying on for a handover may find the covenant period runs from the end of that engagement rather than from completion, which can extend the restriction substantially. If you intend to work again, say so early — negotiating the covenant is far easier than living with it.

Planning What You Will Do Next?

Say so before the covenants are drafted rather than after. A seller who intends to keep working in the sector needs the restriction shaped around that, and it is a straightforward negotiation at the right moment.

Call 01 5827148

Related Reading

Restrictive Covenants - FAQs

Because a large part of what they are buying is goodwill - the customer relationships, the reputation, the staff and the market position - and all of that can walk out the door with the seller. A seller who sells a business on Friday and opens a competing one on Monday, taking the customers and the key staff with them, has sold the buyer considerably less than the buyer paid for. Covenants are how a buyer protects the value of the thing they acquired. That is why courts treat covenants given on a sale of a business differently from covenants in an employment contract: the bargaining positions are different and the buyer has a genuine proprietary interest to protect.

General information, not legal advice. This website contains general information about Irish law on business sales and acquisitions. It is not legal advice and does not create a solicitor—client relationship. Every transaction turns on its own facts — the structure, the documents, the parties, the consents required — and advice on yours requires a consultation.

Nothing here is tax advice, and tax drives structure. The choice between an asset sale and a share sale is very largely a tax question, and it should be settled with your accountant or tax adviser, and by reference to Revenue’s own guidance, before heads of terms are signed rather than afterwards. This firm does not advise on tax, does not state rates, thresholds, reliefs or conditions, and does not indicate any tax outcome.

No valuation advice. This firm does not value businesses, does not suggest multiples and does not advise on price. Valuation is for accountants and corporate finance advisers, and it is a separate exercise from the legal work.

Never both sides of the same deal. The firm acts for buyers and, in separate transactions, for sellers — but never for both parties to the same sale. Conflicts are checked at first contact, before any substantive discussion, which is why the first email should name every individual and entity involved.

No outcome or timeline is promised. Nothing on this site states or implies that a transaction will complete, that a consent will be obtained, that a warranty claim will succeed, or that any deal will proceed to a particular timetable. Where another jurisdiction is involved, the law of that jurisdiction applies to what happens there and requires local advice; this firm advises on Irish law only.

Fees. Fees are agreed in writing with the client at the outset. In contentious business, a solicitor may not calculate fees or other charges as a percentage or proportion of any award or settlement.