Kate has just resigned from her job with Gradgrind Enterprises, where she worked as a researcher on implants for hip replacement operations. Gradgrind also makes heart pacemakers and kidney dialysis machines. She has now found a job with KleenCo, which is a competitor of Gradgrind. Kate has told KleenCo that her contract with Gradgrind contained a restrictive covenant which says "Following the termination of employment, the employee may not carry out work on implants for hip replacement operations, heart pacemakers, kidney dialysis machines or any similar medical devices for a period of 2 years from the date of termination of employment. The employee accepts that this restriction is justified and in the public interest in order to protect the investment that Gradgrind has made in its products."

Required: KleenCo wants Kate to work on hip replacement implants. It wants to know if there is any possibility of challenging the restrictive covenant in favour of Gradgrind. Advise KleenCo by commenting on the enforceability of the restrictive covenant in terms of geographic limitation, parties involved, public interest and the nature of the activity being restrained?