Our experienced team of employment and litigation lawyers have acted in some of the highest-profile team move cases in recent years. We work on both sides of disputes, regularly advising claimants on unlawful team moves and defendants on lawful recruitment exercises, including at the pre-action stage. Our experience means that we‘ve amassed effective strategies to not only litigate these claims but also to mitigate the risk of litigation. We help clients get ahead of competitors’ plans, even those that may have been months or even years in the making.

Cross-Practice Collaboration

Our strong and experienced employment lawyers have a track record of working seamlessly with our seasoned litigators on high-stakes, complex, and cross-border team move disputes.

Agility

We draw on our deep bench of experienced litigators and employment lawyers to shape the right team for each case, and scale in size to respond to the demands of an expedited trial or time-limited settlement scenario.

We also are adept at managing multiple complex workstreams in parallel, in order to reach a positive outcome on an expedited basis.

International Reach

We work with our colleagues in key jurisdictions around the world, drawing on their local employment law, data privacy, and cross-border litigation knowledge to tackle issues that may arise in a multi-jurisdictional team move. In jurisdictions where Mayer Brown does not have an office, we draw on a wealth of connections with local counsel.

Examples of our business protection experience:

• Insurance brokers – Guy Carpenter and Co Ltd v Howden Group Holdings Ltd [2023] EWHC 1114 (KB).
• Cyber security  – Forse & ors v Secarma Ltd & ors [2019] EWCA Civ 215.
• Underwriters – QBE Management Services (UK) Ltd v Dymoke [2012] EWHC 80 (QB).
• A real estate brokerage company – Represented in a high-profile lawsuit against two former brokers alleging claims for breach of the former employees’ non-competition and non-solicitation covenants. We successfully obtained a temporary restraining order and preliminary injunction enforcing the 12-month non-compete on the company’s behalf.  
• Salebuild in Nexsales v. Salebuild – Obtained dismissal with leave to amend and a subsequent voluntary dismissal with prejudice in this trade secret misappropriation and employee-poaching action brought by a competitor.*
• Global interdealer brokers – in Hong Kong we acted on one of the largest poaching cases when more than 35 interdealer brokers and support staff moved en masse from their employer to another. We advised on mitigating the risks associated with the move. The employer who lost the employees applied for a springboard injunction which we successfully defended.
• Data communications and telecommunications equipment provider and one of its executives – Representing in two lawsuits involving restrictive covenant, tortious interference, discrimination, and retaliation claims. After obtaining dismissal of nearly all claims against clients, the case settled on favorable terms.
• Home Point Fin. Corp. v. Lane, et al., No. 6:20-cv-01819 (M.D. Fla. Dec. 14, 2022) – Following an in-person evidentiary hearing, granting preliminary injunction against former management employee who joined plaintiff’s competitor, extending defendant’s non-solicitation covenant for an additional 12 months, and denying new employer’s motion to dismiss.
• Mercer Foods, LLC v. Hulme, et al., C.A. No. 2022-0155 (Del. Ch. 2022) – Enjoining former sales executive from working for the plaintiff’s competitor, soliciting the plaintiff’s employees, or interfering or communicating with the plaintiff’s customers for a 12-month period following the executive’s resignation.
• AptarGroup, Inc. v. Chamulak, 2019 WL 2425175 (N.D. Ill. June 10, 2019) – Denying, in its entirety, motion to dismiss all counts in lawsuit against former executive for alleged breach of her non-compete agreement and violations of federal and state trade secrets statutes.
• Global consulting firm – Defeated attempts by direct competitor to obtain preliminary injunction prohibiting former employees from working for client based on alleged theft of trade secrets and alleged violations of restrictive covenants.*
• Financial institution – Successfully represented senior executive in lawsuit brought by former employer alleging that executive breached restrictive covenants and confidentiality agreement.*
• A designer, manufacturer, and distributor of mobile device accessories – Represented in pre-litigation advice regarding the misappropriation of trade secrets by former employees who resigned from the Company en masse to work for a competitor. We subsequently filed a lawsuit against the competitor and several of our client’s former employees, alleging misappropriation of trade secrets, breach of contract for violations of non-solicitation covenants, breach of the duty of loyalty, violations of California’s Unfair Competition Law, tortious interference with prospective economic advantage, and intentional interference with contractual relations.

* Experience gained by lawyer prior to joining Mayer Brown