Nail technicians lose their polish in spat over clientele

File image

File image

Published Apr 24, 2018

Share

The claws were out in a battle of nail technicians which played out in the Pretoria High Court.

A nail and beauty salon situated in a mall in the south of Joburg was worried that a nail technician who worked there would take the establishment's clientele with her when she opened her own nail bar 5km down the road.

The applicant, Megan’s Nail and Beauty Studio, trading as Perfect 10 Nail & Beauty Studio, wanted the court to urgently place a restraint of trade on Sania Ahmed, who had worked for the business for a year, to prevent her from operating a similar establishment within a 15km radius of Perfect 10.

Ahmed left the company at the end of January to start her own business at the Columbine Square in Mondeor.

She was later joined by her sister, who had also worked at the Perfect 10.

The applicant explained that a nail bar offered an intimate setting, where nail technicians and clients build up a close and personal relationship.

Ahmed and her sister, it said, had excellent interpersonal and technical skills and had managed to develop and maintain relationships with many clients.

Clients, it argued, were likely to want to continue their relationship with Ahmed and her sister, especially as the businesses were situated close together.

They estimated that they could lose 45% of their clientele if the court did not step in.

Perfect 10 argued that it was fair to expect Ahmed to move further away, and operate from at least 15km from her former employer as clients would not all drive so far to have their nails done.

Ahmed, however, argued that the nail and beauty business was what she knew, and a restraint of trade would harm her.

She said she gave her previous employer her word that when she left she would not encourage her former clients to follow her, and described the urgent court application as “a ruse in retaliation of a disgruntled applicant which has been financially crippled due to prevalent economic circumstances”.

She argued that she had only worked for Perfect 10 for a year before she left, and had brought some of her clients to the business.

Acting Judge K Manamela said, given Ahmed's skills and the fact that she had brought some of her previous clients with her to the applicant’s business, it was conceivable that some might want to follow her out of preference.

The judge also pointed out that there were other similar nail bars in the area, and that competition in this industry was thus high. The judge was also not convinced that the distance or a restraint of 15 km would make much difference to loyal clients who would follow her.

Saturday Star 

Related Topics: