A proposed exit can look financially attractive until you reach the clauses restricting what happens after you leave. This guide to settlement agreement restrictive covenants explained sets out what these terms can mean in practice, whether they remain binding, and what to check before you sign away rights or limit your next career move.
What are restrictive covenants in a settlement agreement?
Restrictive covenants are contractual promises that limit certain activities after employment ends. They are often called post-termination restrictions. Their usual purpose is to protect an employer’s legitimate business interests, such as confidential information, client relationships and the stability of its workforce.
A settlement agreement may refer back to restrictions already contained in your employment contract. It may also restate them, amend them or introduce new restrictions. The wording matters. A short sentence confirming that existing covenants continue can have a significant effect if your contract contains detailed non-compete, non-solicitation or non-dealing clauses.
The most common restrictions prevent a departing employee from joining a competitor for a period, approaching clients or prospective clients, dealing with former clients, encouraging colleagues to leave, or recruiting staff. They may apply for three, six, nine or 12 months, depending on the role and the business concerned.
Not every restriction is enforceable simply because it appears in a document. Under English law, a covenant must go no further than reasonably necessary to protect a legitimate business interest. However, that is not a reason to dismiss the clause. A dispute about enforceability can be expensive and stressful, particularly when a new employer is waiting for certainty.
Do existing restrictive covenants survive a settlement agreement?
Often, yes. A settlement agreement typically ends the employment relationship but preserves obligations intended to continue afterwards. Confidentiality duties and restrictive covenants are common examples.
Look carefully for phrases such as “the post-termination restrictions in the contract remain in full force and effect” or “nothing in this agreement releases the employee from continuing obligations”. These provisions can preserve restrictions even where the settlement agreement itself does not repeat every clause.
The position can differ where the agreement states that it replaces all previous arrangements, or expressly releases you from particular covenants. That is why the agreement and your employment contract need to be read together. Reviewing only the settlement agreement can leave an important gap.
For employees, the practical question is not only whether a restriction could ultimately be enforced. It is whether it might interfere with a job offer, a planned consultancy role or the launch of a new business. For employers, clarity avoids later arguments about what was intended to survive termination.
The main types of restrictive covenant
Non-compete clauses
A non-compete clause seeks to stop you working for, setting up or being involved in a competing business for a defined period. This is usually the most restrictive type of covenant, so it requires careful scrutiny. A broad ban on working for any competitor in any capacity may be difficult to justify, especially if your new role does not involve the same clients, confidential information or strategic responsibilities.
The assessment is highly fact-specific. A senior executive with access to pricing strategy and key client plans may face a stronger restriction than an employee with limited commercial exposure. The length of the restriction and the market it covers are also relevant.
Non-solicitation and non-dealing clauses
A non-solicitation clause stops you actively approaching customers, clients, suppliers or colleagues. A non-dealing clause is wider: it can prevent you from doing business with a former client even if that client approaches you first.
The definition of “client” deserves close attention. It may be limited to people you dealt with personally in the previous 12 months, or it may be drafted much more broadly to include anyone known to the employer. A fairer and more workable clause is usually tied to relationships you had material involvement with or knowledge of.
Non-poaching clauses
These clauses restrict attempts to recruit former colleagues. They are usually intended to protect a team from being dismantled after a senior employee leaves. The provision should be clear about which employees are covered and whether it applies only to active solicitation, rather than a colleague independently applying for an advertised vacancy.
Confidentiality and non-disparagement
These are not always restrictive covenants in the strict legal sense, but they often sit alongside them. Confidentiality clauses may protect trade secrets and commercial information, while non-disparagement provisions seek to prevent damaging public statements.
They should not prevent protected disclosures, reporting wrongdoing, cooperating with regulators, or giving truthful evidence where legally required. A settlement agreement should make those limits clear.
What should you check before signing?
First, identify every restriction that may apply. This means checking the settlement agreement, the employment contract, any later variation agreement, bonus or share-plan documents, and sometimes a shareholders’ agreement. Senior employees may have obligations in more than one document.
Next, compare the restrictions against your actual plans. If you have a job offer, consider the duties, employer, territory and start date. If you are considering self-employment, think about the clients you expect to work with and whether you may employ former colleagues. A clause that is manageable in theory may be unworkable in a small specialist sector.
It is also sensible to check whether the settlement agreement includes garden leave or payment in lieu of notice. Time spent on garden leave may reduce the practical impact of a later restriction, but this depends on the drafting. Do not assume periods automatically run together.
Before accepting the payment on offer, consider whether you are being asked to give anything extra in return. If new or wider covenants are being introduced, that may be a proper point for negotiation. The compensation package, notice pay, bonus, holiday pay, reference and restrictions should be considered as a whole.
Can restrictive covenants be negotiated?
Yes. Settlement agreements are voluntary documents, and restrictive covenants are regularly negotiated. The best approach is usually specific and practical rather than confrontational. Explain why the clause affects a genuine next step and propose wording that protects the employer without unnecessarily blocking your future work.
Possible changes may include reducing a six-month restriction to three months, narrowing a client definition, removing prospective clients, limiting a non-compete clause to a particular business area, or adding written consent provisions. If you already have a new role lined up, it may be possible to obtain an express carve-out for that employer and position.
A release from restrictions can be valuable, but it is not always the right outcome. An employer may have legitimate concerns, particularly where a departing employee holds sensitive information or strong client relationships. In that case, a narrower covenant can offer a better balance than an all-or-nothing argument.
Employers should avoid using standard wording without considering the employee’s role. Overly broad restrictions can create delay, damage goodwill and make an otherwise amicable exit harder to achieve. Targeted terms are more likely to be commercially sensible and legally defensible.
Independent advice gives you a clear starting point
For a settlement agreement to validly waive statutory employment claims, the employee must receive advice from an independent adviser on its terms and effect. That advice should include more than the headline compensation figure. Restrictive covenants, confidentiality, tax treatment, reference wording and the claims being waived all deserve proper consideration.
At Arcos Settlement Agreements, the focus is on clear, independent advice in plain English. A careful review can identify whether restrictions are being preserved, widened or introduced for the first time, and whether changes should be requested before you commit.
Do not treat post-termination restrictions as small print. The right wording can protect a business without closing off your next opportunity, and it is far easier to resolve that balance before the agreement is signed.




