ARTICLE
22 January 2026

UK: Government Seeks Views On Reform Of Non-compete Clauses

KL
Herbert Smith Freehills Kramer LLP

Contributor

Herbert Smith Freehills Kramer is a world-leading global law firm, where our ambition is to help you achieve your goals. Exceptional client service and the pursuit of excellence are at our core. We invest in and care about our client relationships, which is why so many are longstanding. We enjoy breaking new ground, as we have for over 170 years. As a fully integrated transatlantic and transpacific firm, we are where you need us to be. Our footprint is extensive and committed across the world’s largest markets, key financial centres and major growth hubs. At our best tackling complexity and navigating change, we work alongside you on demanding litigation, exacting regulatory work and complex public and private market transactions. We are recognised as leading in these areas. We are immersed in the sectors and challenges that impact you. We are recognised as standing apart in energy, infrastructure and resources. And we’re focused on areas of growth that affect every business across the world.
The Government has published a working paper inviting views on options for the reform of non-compete clauses in employment contracts, with responses sought by 18 February 2026.
United Kingdom Employment and HR
Anna Henderson’s articles from Herbert Smith Freehills Kramer LLP are most popular:
  • within Employment and HR topic(s)
  • with Senior Company Executives, HR and Inhouse Counsel
  • in Ireland

The Government has published a working paper inviting views on options for the reform of non-compete clauses in employment contracts, with responses sought by 18 February 2026. This follows an earlier consultation by the previous government, which led to a proposal to impose a statutory cap of three months, but alternative options are now being considered with no preference suggested. The options on which input is sought are:

  • a statutory limit on the length of non-competes, either applicable to all or differing according to company size (for example, three months for larger employers and six months for smaller ones, with the suggested dividing line either at 250 or 50 employees); the duration of non-competes within the cap would still need to be reasonably necessary to be enforceable;
  • a ban on non-compete clauses, either altogether or for employees below a salary threshold
  • a combination of the above, with non-competes banned for those earning less than a salary threshold and capped at three months for higher earners.

The government is not considering the option of requiring payment during the period of non-competes.

The working paper also asks whether any restrictions should apply to other types of restrictive covenants and to 'wider workplace contracts', and, if the cost of litigating covenant disputes in the High Court is an obstacle, how this could be addressed.

Employers may want to submit their views and should keep an eye out for further developments.

The content of this article is intended to provide a general guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought about your specific circumstances.

[View Source]

Mondaq uses cookies on this website. By using our website you agree to our use of cookies as set out in our Privacy Policy.

Learn More