Georgia rewrote its non-compete law in 2011. If your agreement was signed before May 11, 2011, the old common law governs it, and under that law, a non-compete that was too broad in any dimension got thrown out entirely. If it was signed after, the Georgia Restrictive Covenants Act applies. That law let courts fix an overbroad agreement instead of voiding it.
Which version applies to you matters more than almost anything else about your situation. Here is what each law requires and how Georgia courts apply it.
What did Georgia change in 2011?
Before the Georgia Restrictive Covenants Act (O.C.G.A. § 13-8-50 et seq., effective May 11, 2011), Georgia courts applied one of the most employee-friendly non-compete standards in the country. A non-compete that was unreasonable in geographic scope, duration, or the scope of restricted activity got voided entirely. Courts could not modify or narrow it. The agreement was either valid as written or dead.
That created a situation where employers kept writing overly broad agreements knowing that an employee would have to litigate to kill one, and where courts occasionally voided agreements that would have been perfectly reasonable with a few words changed.
The 2011 Act, enabled by a 2010 amendment to the Georgia Constitution (Art. III, Sec. VI, Par. V(c)), changed the default. Courts now have authority to modify a post-2011 non-compete to the extent necessary to make it enforceable rather than voiding it entirely. That shift matters enormously for both employees and employers.
What makes a Georgia non-compete enforceable under the 2011 Act?
Three elements. The restriction has to be reasonable in each of them, and the burden is on the party seeking to enforce the agreement to establish reasonableness.
Duration. The Act creates a rebuttable presumption that two years or less is reasonable for employees and independent contractors. That does not mean anything under two years is automatically enforceable. It means the employer does not have to prove reasonableness for a duration under two years. More than two years shifts the burden. Agreements running five or ten years rarely survive review.
Geographic scope. The scope must match the territory the employee worked in or had responsibility for. A regional sales manager covering the Southeast can be restricted from competing in the Southeast. The same restriction on an office manager who never left Savannah will not hold. The Act specifically permits basing geographic scope on the territory the employee covered during the two years before separation.
Scope of activity restricted. The restriction must be limited to activities the employee performed or had knowledge of, not everything the employer does. A marketing employee can be restricted from marketing roles at competitors. Restricting that same employee from any role in the same industry, regardless of job function, is overbroad.
One important caveat: the Act only applies to agreements with employees, independent contractors, distributors, and franchisees. A non-compete between two businesses in an asset purchase agreement operates under different standards and is generally more enforceable. The rules shift depending on what relationship you are in and why the agreement was signed.
What happens to agreements signed before May 11, 2011?
The old common law applies, not the Act. Under Georgia’s pre-2011 common law, a non-compete had to be reasonable in time, territory, and scope, but the treatment of an overbroad agreement was different. The court voided the entire agreement rather than modifying it.
Georgia courts before 2011 refused to apply the “blue pencil” doctrine, the idea that a court can strike objectionable portions and enforce the rest. The whole covenant was treated as one indivisible promise. This gave employees a powerful defense: if any part of the restriction was overbroad, the whole thing fell.
If you have a pre-2011 agreement, it is worth getting a review. Many of these agreements were drafted broadly enough to be void under the old standard, and employers who have not updated their agreements since 2011 may not realize their pre-Act documents are unenforceable as written.
What can an employer protect under Georgia law?
Georgia’s Restrictive Covenants Act protects legitimate business interests. Four categories are explicitly recognized as legitimate:
- Trade secrets. Defined under O.C.G.A. § 10-1-761. A non-compete protecting trade secrets is the strongest category. Courts treat trade secret protection as a core purpose of these agreements.
- Confidential business information. Customer lists, pricing, supplier relationships, business methods. The key is that the information must be confidential and give the business a competitive advantage.
- Substantial relationships with customers and prospects. An employer can protect existing customer relationships that the employee developed or had meaningful contact with. Cold contacts or publicly available customer lists get less protection.
- Specialized training. If an employer invests substantially in training an employee in proprietary skills or methods, that investment can support enforcement of a reasonable restriction.
What an employer cannot protect is the general skills and knowledge an employee brings to a job or develops through their own work over time. Non-competes that try to prevent someone from using their professional expertise, as opposed to confidential information or customer relationships, face serious challenges under Georgia law.
If you have been threatened with a non-compete lawsuit, what are your options?
First: do not assume the agreement is enforceable. Review it against the current law before taking any action in response to a threat letter. Many non-competes sent to former employees as enforcement letters have real deficiencies, such as a wrong date, overbroad scope, or missing elements, that affect whether a court would issue an injunction.
Second: understand what relief the employer is seeking. A temporary restraining order or preliminary injunction against you is the most common immediate threat. Georgia courts apply a standard for preliminary injunctions that requires the employer to show likelihood of success on the merits, immediate irreparable harm, and that the balance of harms favors the injunction. These are not automatic.
Third: garden leave matters. If you have already started working for a competitor, the calculus is different from if you are planning to. Courts issuing injunctions consider what harm has already occurred and what the status quo is.
If you are an employer, the most common mistake is not having updated your agreements since 2011. A pre-2011 form, or a post-2011 form that was drafted without counsel, may not satisfy the Act’s requirements and may not hold up when you need it. Getting one enforceable agreement drafted correctly is cheaper than finding out in litigation that yours was not.
Frequently asked questions
Does Georgia enforce non-compete agreements?
Yes, post-2011 Georgia non-compete agreements that meet the requirements of O.C.G.A. § 13-8-50 et seq. are enforceable. Georgia courts can issue injunctions to stop a former employee from competing in violation of a valid agreement. Pre-2011 agreements are evaluated under a stricter standard and are often unenforceable as written.
How long can a Georgia non-compete last?
The Georgia Restrictive Covenants Act creates a rebuttable presumption that two years or less is a reasonable duration for employees. Agreements longer than two years are presumptively unreasonable and face a higher bar to enforcement. The clock on duration typically runs from the date of separation.
Can a Georgia court modify a non-compete that is too broad?
Yes, for agreements signed on or after May 11, 2011. Under the Georgia Restrictive Covenants Act, courts have authority to modify or blue-pencil an overbroad covenant to make it enforceable rather than voiding it entirely. Pre-2011 agreements were void in their entirety if any element was overbroad. Courts could not modify them.
If I signed a non-compete in another state but work in Georgia, which law applies?
It depends on the choice-of-law clause in the agreement and where you work. Georgia courts will apply a choice-of-law provision if it does not violate Georgia public policy. Some states have non-compete law significantly more favorable to employees than Georgia’s; others are less favorable. If there is no choice-of-law clause, courts typically apply the law of the state with the most significant relationship to the agreement. This is an area where the specific language of the agreement matters a great deal.
Does leaving a job voluntarily versus being fired affect my non-compete?
Generally, no. A Georgia non-compete does not automatically become unenforceable because you were terminated rather than quitting. The nature of the separation can matter in some circumstances (for example, if the employer materially breached the employment agreement), but the non-compete’s enforceability turns primarily on whether it meets the statutory requirements, not on how the employment ended.
Last reviewed July 2026 by Victoria Helgesen, State Bar of Georgia #630432.
