In this episode of Industry & Leadership, Onyx's CEO Greg Newman sits down with barrister Adam Solomon KC to unpack one of the most closely watched employment-law disputes in the commodities trading world.

The discussion centres on a highly unusual non-compete case involving illness during a year-long notice period, alleged competitive activity, and the complex interaction between medical evidence, confidential information, and restrictive covenants.

Adam explains why this case stood out: the courts were asked to decide whether a company could enforce 12 months of notice plus 12 months of non-compete, effectively keeping an employee out of the market for two years. The episode explores how judges approach questions of illness, memory-based knowledge, confidentiality, and the credibility of competing narratives.

Greg and Adam also examine the broader dynamics behind employer-versus-employer disputes, the strategic behaviour of legal teams, and the often-misunderstood role of conduct, regulatory issues, and aggressively obtained evidence in determining outcomes.

⏱️ Chapters
00:00 – Introduction & Case Background
01:27 – Illness, Notice Periods & Covenant Enforcement
02:20 – Why This Dispute Was Unusual
03:22 – What the Case Was Really About: Business vs Business
05:55 – Confidential Information, Memory & Non-Competes
07:45 – Judicial Reasoning & Technical Evidence
10:12 – Regulatory Concerns, Exchanges & Brokers
12:05 – Contrasting Outcomes: Why One Employee Won & One Lost
13:48 – Employer Conduct, Ethics & Evidence Gathering
20:55 – Strategy, Law Firm Tactics & Litigation Dynamics
27:00 – Broader Implications for Non-Competes & the Market
32:05 – Costs, Damages & What Would Have Happened on Appeal
35:06 – Final Thoughts & Closing Remarks

📲 Follow us:
Linktree: https://linktr.ee/flux_energy
YouTube: https://www.youtube.com/@UCmyBe-R7Do6ZGWLyaStSosg 
LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/company/fluxinstitute
X (Twitter): https://x.com/FluxEnergyNews
Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/flux_energy_markets