2023-11-22 22:05:28
A fitness club filed a lawsuit in the Dubai Civil Court against a former trainer, claiming that he was harmed by “disclosing his secrets” and transferring clients at the club who were training with him to a famous competing club. The plaintiff demanded that the defendants (the coach and the competing club) pay him an amount of 51 thousand dirhams in compensation for the losses he suffered due to his clients canceling their subscriptions or not renewing after their expiry, due to the coach directing them to move with him to the new club.
The plaintiff club stated in the case papers that it is a company that has a professional license from the Dubai Silicon Oasis Authority, and is licensed to practice non-pharmaceutical trade activities, a fitness club for men, and another for women, in addition to two health clubs.
The club explained that the first defendant had been working as a coach for it for a period of more than three years, then left the job upon resignation, without adhering to the legal notice period prescribed for the duration of the work.
The fitness club (plaintiff) indicated that he was surprised, after the coach left work, that he contacted the club’s clients and directed them to cancel their subscriptions to the company in which he was working, and incited them to subscribe to the competing club, which caused damage to the first club, in light of its violation of the condition of non-competition and non-competition. “Disclosing secrets”, since the club (the second defendant) works in the same field.
The plaintiff company presented a portfolio of documents that included a copy of the employment contract concluded with the coach, which includes a non-competition clause, in addition to maintaining the confidentiality of information, and a letter issued by one of the clients stating that the coach asked him to move to the competing club.
For his part, the coach (the defendant) submitted a memorandum of response through a legal representative, in which he demanded that the lawsuit not be accepted for not following the legal path, and that it be rejected due to lack of validity and proof. The competing club also submitted a memorandum in which it requested that the lawsuit not be accepted because it was filed against someone without legal capacity, in addition to Lack of validity and reliability.
After examining the case and the memorandums of its parties, the court concluded that the first defendant should not accept the case, for not following the path set by the law, as it is stipulated, according to the text of Article Six of the Labor Law, that if the employer and the worker, or any person entitled to them, dispute any of the rights They must submit a request to the competent labor department, and the claim will not be accepted if the procedures stipulated in this article are not followed.
She explained that, according to what is stated in the papers, the relationship between the plaintiff club and the coach is a contractual relationship regulated by the labor law, and the amount of compensation requested arose from damages sustained due to the defendant’s breach of the non-competition condition present in the contract, and therefore it was necessary for the company that owns the club to first resort to the Department. Work before resorting to court, and the papers were empty of anything indicating that she had done so, and then the court ruled not to accept the case, for not following the path prescribed by the law.
• The company that owns the club had to first resort to the Labor Department before the court.
1700714523
#fitness #club #sues #trainer #charges #disclosing #secrets