Quote: El Diablo "In hindsight not inducing Harris to breach his contract would have helped.
Still, the current chairman wasn't involved in that deal was he? Oh.'"
I think it was seemingly more a case of the former Chairman being so sure that the contractual arrangements supposedly binding Harris would be voidable as a restraint of trade, that he never considered the possibility that the restraint of trade might be judged a valid one?
I suspect (a pure guess, obviously...) he, being a lawyer himself of such renown on whom you would expect to be able to rely, will have assured his fellow directors (of which only Hood remains) that this was assuredly the case. Assuming of course he made them aware of the full details in the first place, which only those involved will know.
