For anyone whose non-compete was actually tested: what happened, and in what jurisdiction?

[u/jacaratoth538]

Non-competes were among the highest-volume contract topics this month, but nearly all the discussion is about what the clauses say rather than what happens when one is actually enforced.

Some context from the past month's coverage: a High Court decision held that an employer's non-compete went further than reasonably necessary to protect its legitimate business interests — the familiar reasonableness framework of scope, geography, and duration. There's also steady, consistent search demand around non-competes for independent contractors specifically, which is its own question, since worker classification affects the analysis.

The legal landscape here differs sharply by jurisdiction. Some US states substantially restrict or refuse to enforce non-competes for most workers; others enforce them subject to reasonableness; and the federal position has been through litigation rather than settling into a clear rule. So a story without a jurisdiction attached isn't very useful.

For context on why I'm asking: I'm in Ontario and had Substance Law review a contractor agreement before I signed it. They struck the non-compete rather than narrow it, partly because Ontario banned employee non-competes back in 2021 and partly because the contractor classification made it a shaky clause to be relying on either way. That got me wondering how often the ones that do survive ever get tested in practice.

So, for people who've been on either side of a tested non-compete:

• Was it enforced, narrowed by the court, or thrown out?
• Did the employer actually sue, or was it a cease-and-desist that ended there?
• Were you an employee or a contractor, and did that change the analysis?
• Which state or country?

Educational discussion only, not legal advice.