Case Study: Aaden Detectives Prove Violations of Non-Compete Clauses

Competing Activity Despite Non-Compete Clause

Recently, the HR manager of a larger Berlin-based GmbH contacted Aaden Detective Agency Berlin to inquire about the possibilities of proving violations of non-compete or competition clauses through our detectives. The background was a former employee who had access to client and contract data and had been obligated, in exchange for a not insignificant compensation payment, not to engage in any activity with a competitor for a period of two calendar years. However, the HR manager had now heard that the employee in question was working on a freelance basis for several direct competitors and, additionally, had even entered into competition with his former employer himself through his self-employment. The Berlin-based GmbH would be entitled to a substantial contractual penalty if the former employee could be proven in violation, and therefore saw Aaden Detective Agency Berlin as the right partner to provide evidence of the prohibited activity – and she was right.

Detectives Conduct Direct Surveillance of the Target Individual

After evaluating the information provided and conducting a tactical briefing within the team, our Berlin detectives, in consultation with the client, concluded that direct surveillance of the target individual starting early in the morning would be the best approach. The starting point would be the known residential address.

On the first day of the operation, an observation team consisting of three detectives positioned themselves in a quiet residential neighborhood in southwest Berlin. The streets were narrow and the neighbors attentive, which required our detectives to reposition frequently. At 07:30, a teenager left the target individual’s house with a backpack and headed toward a bus stop. At 08:15, the garage door opened and the presumed wife of the target individual drove off the property. However, a look into the open garage caused the deployed Berlin detectives to pause, as apart from the probable wife’s vehicle, there was no other car in the garage. Nor was the known target vehicle visible in the driveway or in the immediate vicinity. Up to that point, our Berlin detectives had assumed that this vehicle was parked inside the garage. The operations management of Aaden Detective Agency Berlin then consulted with the client.

Object Check During Surveillance

As part of the preliminary investigation, including a site inspection and surveillance area assessment prior to the operation, our Berlin detectives had of course verified whether the address known to the client from the former employment contract was still current. According to the residents’ registration records, the target individual had been living at this address for 14 years, and the inspection of the mailbox and doorbell nameplates also confirmed the target’s name. Nothing indicated that the target individual had moved. Perhaps he was on a business trip?

One detective from Aaden Detective Agency Berlin took the risk of being compromised for the remainder of the operation by approaching the house and ringing the doorbell openly. There was no response whatsoever inside the property, which suggested that the target individual was not at home and that the operation should be terminated for that day.

Second Operation One Week Later

Since, from the client’s perspective, there was no immediate urgency in this matter—the non-compete obligation still had 18 months remaining—the corporate investigators of Aaden Detective Agency Berlin resumed the operation one week later on a different weekday, at the same time and location.

Again, the target vehicle was not visible in the surrounding area; this time, however, the wife’s vehicle was parked in the driveway, leading to the assumption that the target vehicle was in the garage. The teenager and the woman left the property at roughly the same times as during the first surveillance. After that, everything remained quiet. It became 10:00, then 11:00, 12:00, and finally 13:00, without any indication that the target individual was present. After consulting with the client, and considering that the teenager might soon return, one of our Berlin detectives once again approached the property and rang the doorbell—again, no response. The operation was terminated for two of the detectives.

Meanwhile, the third investigator discreetly inquired in the neighborhood under a suitable pretext as to when the target individual was usually present. From an older local resident, our detective learned that the target individual had been “kicked out” by his wife two months earlier. Apparently, it had caused quite a scene.

Change of Strategy by Our Detectives

With this information, it became clear to all parties why the target individual could not be found on either surveillance day and that future attempts at this location would also be unsuccessful. Two options now presented themselves: either Aaden Detective Agency Berlin would conduct an address investigation to determine the new residence of the target individual. However, this would likely be complex, as the target had apparently not reported the new address to the residents’ registration office, health insurance provider, pension authority, or postal service. The second idea came from the client: she was aware of a specific business where the target individual was very likely working regularly, although the exact days and times were unknown. Our Berlin detectives would simply have to conduct surveillance until the target appeared. The client was willing to take the financial risk, given the substantial contractual penalty at stake and the desire to send a clear message to the workforce. Accordingly, our Berlin corporate investigators positioned two surveillance operatives at the premises of the known competitor on the next business day.

Patience Pays Off: Detectives Identify the Target Individual

For three additional days, nothing relevant occurred at the surveillance location. Both the detectives of Aaden Detective Agency Berlin and the client began to worry that all previous efforts might have been in vain. However, as is often the case in detective work, patience and trust in the abilities of our Berlin investigators were ultimately rewarded. On the fourth day on site, the suspected former employee finally appeared at the observed business premises and carried out activities over a period of six hours that clearly fell within the scope of the contractually prohibited work. Thanks to the documentation provided by our detectives, the client now has legally admissible evidence that can be used to assert her legal claims against the target individual. This includes, among other things, the detective costs, which were necessary to prove the violation.