In a deed, a grantee may agree to do something or refrain from doing certain acts. This agreement will become a binding contract between the grantor and the grantee. An example would be an agreement to maintain fences on the property or that the property will only be used for residential purposes. This kind of covenant is binding, not only between the grantor and the grantee, but also runs with the land. This means that anyone acquiring the land from the grantee is also bound by the covenant of the grantee. A covenant that provides that the grantee will refrain from certain conduct is called a restrictive or protective covenant. For example, there may be a covenant that no mobile home shall be placed on the property.
A restrictive or protective covenant may limit the kind of structure that can be placed on the property and may also restrict the use that can be made of the land. For example, when a tract of land is developed for individual lots and homes to be built, it is common to use the same restrictive covenants in all of the deeds in order to cause uniform restrictions and patterns on the property. For example, the developer may provide that no home may be built under a certain number of square feet. Any person acquiring a lot within the tract will be bound by the restrictions if they are placed in the deed or a prior recorded deed. Also, these restrictive covenants may be placed in a document at the outset of the development entitled "Restrictive Covenants," and list all the restrictive covenants that will apply to the tracts of land being developed. Any subsequent deed can then refer back to the book and page number where these restrictive covenants are recorded. Any person owning one of the lots in the tract may bring suit against another lot owner to enforce the restrictive covenants. However, restrictive covenants may be abandoned or not enforceable by estoppel if the restrictive covenants are violated openly for a sufficient period of time in order for a Court to declare that the restriction has been abandoned.
Contract With Restrictive Covenants In Alameda
Category:
State:
Multi-State
County:
Alameda
Control #:
US-00404BG
Format:
Word;
Rich Text
Instant download
Description
Free preview
Form popularity
FAQ
In the minority of jurisdictions, like California, courts will likewise disregard the fact that something is labelled as a covenant not to solicit customers and/or clients, and may instead deem it akin to a covenant not to compete and treat it as such.
Clawback provisions are legally permissible because the bonus is not “earned” until the employee fulfills the contractual obligations. However, under California law, the employer cannot withhold the bonus from the employee's final wages, even if the employee fails to meet the conditions.
Generally, covenants not to solicit other employees are permitted in California, provided that the employer seeking to enforce the covenant can meet the reasonableness criteria above and can show that the solicitation caused business disruption or had other significant negative impacts on its business.
Recently, Governor Gavin Newsom signed two bills into law that amend the California Business and Professions Code to further strengthen California's laws against restrictive covenants. Effective January 1, 2024, the ban on virtually all non-compete clauses is now codified.
Restrictive covenants are contracts entered into between the employer and employee to protect the employer's business interests, such as trade secrets and other confidential information, investments in employee training, and customer goodwill. Types of Restrictive Covenants.
California generally bans non-compete agreements “regardless of where and when the contract was signed,” and “whether … the employment was maintained outside of California.” Practically speaking, California prohibits all employers from enforcing these agreements.
The easiest way to elude the requirements of a restrictive covenant is to simply ignore it. Covenants can become unenforceable if they expire, if there is a history of the covenant being violated, or if there is no individual or group benefiting from them.
To officially end the restrictive covenants, it may be necessary to file a lawsuit seeking a declaration from a court that the covenants are no longer enforceable. This can be a complex legal process that may require the assistance of an attorney.
Current and Future Agreements Agreements containing impermissible covenants are “unenforceable regardless of where or when the contract was signed” (BPC § 16600.5(a)), and regardless of whether “the employment was maintained outside of California” (BPC § 16600.5(b)).