离职两个月，前公司通知我竞业限制-竞业限制知识大全|极兔竞调
我离职后两个月了，前公司突然通知我履行竞业限制义务。之前没有任何预兆，这是什么情况？
用人单位与劳动者的竞业限制约定以通知劳动者作为生效要件，用人单位未在约定期限履行通知义务，则视为该生效条件
未成就，劳动者无需履行竞业限制义务。
案件详情：
刘某与公司双方于2017年9月20日解除劳动合同，离职交接单约定如刘某收到公司发出的《竞业限制补偿金通知》，则须履行
竞业限制义务。否则，公司无需支付竞业限制补偿金，刘某亦无需履行竞业限制义务。
2017年11月30日，公司向刘某发送电子邮件通知刘某离职后需要履行双方《劳动合同》中约定的竞业限制义务，并单方确定
竞业限制期限为6个月，现公司要求刘某继续履行竞业限制义务，并支付违反竞业限制义务的违约金，返还已经支付的补偿金。
刘某主张其离职时，公司未向其发出《竞业限制补偿金通知》，故其无需履行竞业限制义务。
审理结果：
“双方签署的《离职交接单》明确将公司是否向刘某发出《竞业限制补偿金通知》作为确认刘某是否需履行竞业限制义务的条件。
公司并未在刘某离职时向其发送《竞业限制补偿金通知》要求其履行竞业限制义务，则刘某无需履行竞业限制义务。公司于2017
年11月30日向刘某发送《竞业限制补偿金通知》明显超过合理期限，对刘某不产生约束力。”
法院观点：
竞业限制是指负有特定义务的员工在任职期间或者离开岗位后一定期间内不得自营或为他人经营与其所任职的企业同类的产品或
业务。竞业限制制度的立法目的在于保护用人单位商业秘密的同时，由用人单位在竞业限制期限内按月向劳动者支付经济补偿，
以平衡对劳动者的自主择业权造成的影响。鉴于竞业限制义务系对劳动者自主择业权利的限制，为保障权利义务的确定性，用人
单位与劳动者约定以用人单位在解除或终止劳动合同时向劳动者履行告知义务作为生效条件的，用人单位应当在约定期限内通知
履行竞业限制义务，否则将导致劳动者的权利义务长期处于不确定状态，劳动者和用人单位权利严重失衡。因此，如用人单位未
在约定期限履行通知义务，则视为该生效条件未成就，劳动者无需履行竞业限制义务。
个人碎碎念：
其实吧，这个案子公司也不是没通知，而是在正式解除合同以后两个月多一点的时间通知。但这个时间被法院认定为“不合理的
期限”，就，你离职的时候不说，两个月过去突然给劳动者发个通知，要求他履行竞业，劳动者和法院可不认哈。这样其实是法
院对劳动者的保护，不使劳动者的权利义务长期处于不确定状态。
极兔竞调，专注竞业限制12年，关注我，教你如何破局！
It has been two months since I resigned, and my former company suddenly notified me to fulfill my non compete
obligations. There was no warning before, what's going on?
The non compete agreement between the employer and the employee requires notification to the employee as an
effective requirement. If the employer fails to fulfill the notification obligation within the agreed period, it shall be
deemed that the effective condition has not been met, and the employee is not required to fulfill the non compete obligation.
Case details:
Liu and the company terminated their labor contract on September 20, 2017. The resignation handover agreement
stipulates that if Liu receives a notice of non compete compensation from the company, he must fulfill his non compete
obligations. Otherwise, the company does not need to pay non compete compensation, and Liu does not need to
fulfill non compete obligations.
On November 30, 2017, the company sent an email to Liu informing him that he needed to fulfill the non compete
obligations stipulated in the labor contract between the two parties after leaving, and unilaterally determined the non
compete period to be 6 months. The company now requires Liu to continue fulfilling the non compete obligations, pay
the penalty for violating the non compete obligations, and return the compensation already paid.
Liu claimed that when he resigned, the company did not issue him a notice of non compete compensation, so he did
not need to fulfill his non compete obligations.
Trial result:
The 'Resignation Handover Form' signed by both parties clearly states whether the company has issued a 'Non
Competition Compensation Notice' to Liu as a condition for confirming whether Liu needs to fulfill the non competition
obligation. If the company did not send a 'Non Competition Compensation Notice' to Liu when he resigned, Liu does
not need to fulfill the non competition obligation. The company sent a 'Non Competition Compensation Notice' to Liu
on November 30, 2017, which clearly exceeded a reasonable period of time and does not have binding force on Liu
Court opinion:
Non compete restriction refers to employees who have specific obligations and are not allowed to engage in self operated
or operated products or businesses similar to those of the company they work for during their tenure or for a certain period
of time after leaving their position. The legislative purpose of the non compete system is to protect the trade secrets of
employers while allowing employers to pay economic compensation to employees on a monthly basis during the non
compete period, in order to balance the impact on employees' right to choose their own jobs. Given that the obligation
of non compete is a restriction on the right of workers to choose their own jobs, in order to ensure the certainty of rights
and obligations, if the employer and the worker agree that the obligation of informing the worker when the employer
terminates or terminates the labor contract is a condition for effectiveness, the employer should notify the worker to fulfill
the non compete obligation within the agreed period. Otherwise, it will result in the worker's rights and obligations being
in an uncertain state for a long time, and the rights of the worker and the employer will be seriously imbalanced. Therefore,
if the employer fails to fulfill the notification obligation within the agreed period, it shall be deemed that the effective condition
has not been fulfilled, and the employee shall not be required to fulfill the non compete obligation.
Personal thoughts:
Actually, the company did not fail to notify us about this case, but rather notified us a little over two months after the formal
termination of the contract. But this time has been deemed an "unreasonable deadline" by the court. When you resign, if you
suddenly send a notice to the employee two months later, requiring him to perform non compete, the employee and the court
may not agree. This is actually the court's protection of workers, preventing their rights and obligations from being in a state
of uncertainty for a long time.
Jitu Competitive Adjustment, focusing on non compete restrictions for 12 years, follow me and teach you how to break through!
你可能还会感兴趣的话题：
扫码联系我们