12. I had a non-competition in my work, but I was fired. Can they do it against me when they have decided to fire me? Each state has slightly different laws on non-competition prohibitions, some of which limit to varying degrees the recognition of these and other states. In California, for example, non-competition prohibitions are invalid, while Texas recognizes its validity in certain circumstances. This five-track test, used by Connecticut courts, is disjunctive and non-subjunctive, meaning that a non-competition agreement can be declared unenforceable and invalidated if it has a negative effect on a single factor56. While some factors may become more important, the legal analysis of non-compete agreements in Connecticut shows that each element of the decision on the applicability of a restrictive pact is essentially equal and balanced. In terms of geographic scope, non-competition prohibitions are more likely to be applied in court if they do not limit a worker beyond the areas in which he or she has actually worked for the employer attempting to enforce the agreement. Restrictions that go beyond these geographic areas are generally considered inappropriate. Section 27 of the Indian Contract Act has a general block of any agreement that puts in place a trade restriction.  On this basis, it would appear that all non-competition clauses in India are null and void. However, the Indian Supreme Court has clarified that certain non-competition clauses may be in the interests of trade and commerce, and such clauses are not prohibited by Section 27 of the Contract Act and are therefore valid in India.
 In particular, only clauses supported by a clear objective, considered beneficial for trade and trade, survive this test. For example, a co-founder of a start-up who has signed a non-compete clause may be, but if a junior software developer or call center employee signs a non-compete clause with the employer, this may not apply. For many workers, geographical limitation can be more problematic and worrying than time limitation. The courts of that state have repeatedly stated that “the general rule is that the application of a restrictive federal government be limited to an appropriate geographic area in light of the particular situation.” The Tribunal analyzes geographical restriction in the same way as the assessment of time limitation – geographical terms are analysed in the context of the specific facts of the situation and the particular sector in which employers and workers are employed. Non-compete prohibitions under Connecticut law may be struck down if a geographic restriction is broad enough to restrict or prevent a former employee from “doing his or her usual vocation and earning a living and thus working unreasonably.” While non-competition clauses are analysed in accordance with national law and each state is different, certain common factors are examined by the courts to determine whether a non-compete agreement is appropriate: for new workers, the best practice is to include in the letter of offer a declaration that a condition of employment has entered into a non-compete agreement or an employment agreement containing a non-compete clause.