Get marketing news you’ll actually want to read

Noncompete and non-solicitation clauses in commercial real estate brokerage agreements must balance business protections with enforceability. A solid draft begins with a clear purpose, specifying legitimate business interests such as confidential information, client relationships, and unique broker know-how. The agreement should define geographic boundaries, time limits, and the scope of restricted activities in precise terms, avoiding blanket prohibitions that courts often view as overly broad. Courts assess reasonableness, necessity, and proportionality, so the drafter should tailor restrictions to the specific deal, market segment, and the parties involved. Inclusion of carve-outs for certain active properties or ongoing negotiations helps preserve essential business functions while maintaining protective value.

Before drafting, gather comprehensive context about the brokerage’s structure, client lists, and ongoing engagements. Identify which client relationships are protected and how those clients are likely to interact with the market post-transaction. Consider the different roles within the brokerage, such as listing agents, buyer’s representatives, and support staff, and determine whether the restrictions apply to all personnel or only to licensed brokers. The document should also specify remedies, such as injunctions or liquidated damages, and indicate how disputes will be resolved, whether through arbitration or court proceedings. A well-prepared background makes the enforceability assessment smoother and reduces the risk of later disputes.

The core of a durable noncompete clause lies in a precise description of restricted activities. Instead of vague prohibitions, describe the prohibited conduct in terms of "solicitation of clients represented by the firm in connection with commercial real estate transactions within [geographic area] for a period of [X] months/years." Pair this with a prohibition on engaging in activities that would directly exploit confidential information learned during the engagement. Include examples that illustrate what constitutes a prohibited action and what would be permissible. A detailed, scenario-based approach helps both sides understand expectations and reduces the likelihood of claims that a clause is overbroad or unfair.

Non-solicitation provisions focus on relationships rather than activities per se, targeting direct recruitment of clients and personnel. Specify who counts as a client or employee for purposes of the restriction, and clarify exceptions for unsolicited inquiries or passive relationships formed independent of the parties’ actions. Conditions such as a minimum holding period after termination and a requirement to cease solicitation upon notice can provide a practical framework. The enforceability analysis should address whether the provision protects legitimate interests without impeding competition or causing undue hardship. Drafting with precision here safeguards against clouded interpretations during enforcement.

When defining geographic scope, courts scrutinize whether the area is narrowly tailored to protect the client base and market. For commercial real estate, a useful approach is to anchor the geographic restriction to the principal markets where the firm operates or where the protected clients reside. Alternatively, link geography to the locations of the properties actively listed or managed during the term of the agreement. Avoid sweeping multi-state regions unless a compelling business justification exists. The geographic framing should be auditable and understood by all parties, which eases compliance and reduces the risk of post-transaction recourse.

Time limitations should reflect the period necessary to protect client relationships without tying up market opportunities indefinitely. A common structure uses a tail period that begins at termination, such as six to twelve months, with an optional longer tail for highly sensitive cases. Consider day-count or calendar-based terms to minimize ambiguity. If the contract involves evergreen relationships or ongoing project pipelines, the clause can specify transitional obligations that gradually wind down. The target is a balance: enough time to protect the client base, but not so long that enforceability becomes doubtful or creates disproportionate hardship for former associates.

Drafting noncompete provisions also requires careful attention to consideration. Ensure the agreement clearly states what consideration is provided in exchange for the restrictions, whether upfront fees, access to proprietary tools, or ongoing compensation. Without adequate consideration, the enforceability of post-employment restraints can be challenged. The consideration section should specify who pays, when payment occurs, and what recourse exists if the agreement is terminated prematurely. Transparent treatment of consideration reduces later disputes about the existence or adequacy of the incentive to comply with restrictive covenants.

Compliance with law and public policy is essential. jurisdictions differ on enforceability thresholds, and some impose restrictions based on the employee’s status or the type of business. A prudent approach is to reference applicable statutes and case law in the governing law clause and to include severability provisions so that if one restriction is struck, the remainder remains intact. The drafter should avoid tying restraints to unrelated illegal activities, and instead anchor limitations to protectable interests. Finally, provide a mechanism for periodic review to adjust the clauses as market conditions and regulatory guidance evolve.

Remedies and enforcement mechanisms should be clearly outlined to deter breaches while preserving court efficiency. Include both injunctive relief and remedies for breach, such as damages or disgorgement of profits, where permissible. Define the process for seeking relief, including notice requirements, the standard of proof, and any mandatory mediation or expedited hearings. A strong clause also addresses costs and attorneys’ fees, which can influence a court’s willingness to grant interim relief. By signaling readiness to enforce with appropriate remedies, the clause discourages casual violations and reinforces the seriousness of the agreement.

Consider addenda or schedules that list protected clients, properties, and relationships to avoid ambiguity. A well-organized exhibit can serve as a reference point during disputes by providing concrete examples of protected categories. Ensure these lists are kept current and are updated with changes in client rosters, listings, or market focus. The schedule should include identifiers such as client names, property addresses, and engagement dates to minimize interpretive disputes. A dynamic exhibit helps maintain enforceability while reducing the risk of overbreadth creeping into the agreement.

Negotiation leverage matters in the final drafting stage, and so does the accountability of all parties. The drafting process should encourage collaboration, with each side offering definitions, exceptions, and redlines. A well-negotiated document reflects mutual interests, while preserving essential protections. In negotiating enforceability, prioritize clarity over complexity and favor plain language that stands up in court. Ultimately, a robust agreement emerges from iterative reviews, redlines, and explicit confirmations that both sides understand and accept the implications of the restrictive covenants.

Finally, consider a compliance framework that includes training, notice, and monitoring provisions. Training materials can inform brokers about the scope and purpose of noncompete and non-solicitation restrictions, reducing inadvertent violations. A notice mechanism ensures that departures trigger reminders about ongoing obligations. Monitoring should be proportionate and lawful, avoiding privacy intrusions while maintaining a credible deterrent. By integrating these elements, the agreement becomes not only enforceable but also a practical, behavior-informed tool that supports fair competition and protects client trust in the brokerage relationship.