Talk:Restraint of trade/Archives/2015

Correct? Worldwide view?

This article seems to be about the English common law of restraint of trade, which is mainly of importance to non-compete provisions in employment and transfer of business contracts. The case law discussed is all English and very old, although for some mysterious reason there are badly-formatter links to two Scottish cases at the bottom (with no discussion of them). I have corrected some obvious errors and duplication, and moved the ancient history section to the bottom. I could (at some point when I have time) try to check that what is left is not too wrong. I don't know what "Wilberforce (1966) 7" refers to but I worry that the history section (including the seemingly irrelevant bit on consideration) might have been copied from there.

Before worrying about that, I wonder whether some attention should be given to the lack of a worldwide (or at least common law wide) view. Could anyone who understands the state of US, Canadian, Australian, anywhere-else-relevant law on these matters please comment on whether the old English principles apply there, and whether there is anything interesting to say? Proz 05:58, 9 September 2007 (UTC)

I added some US material. PraeceptorIP (talk) 20:07, 22 July 2015 (UTC)

Many red cites in text

There are many red entries for [[nonexistent]] internal links to cases. (The look like this: nonexistent case cite.)

Would somebody (perhaps whoever cited them in the first place) care to write the articles repredented by the [[nonexistent red entries]]? It would improve the article. Thank you. PraeceptorIP (talk) 21:20, 23 July 2015 (UTC)