North American Senior Benefits sought to enforce restrictive covenants against two former employees. The Court of Appeals had held that a covenant was geographically unreasonable because it lacked an express geographic term. The Supreme Court of Georgia reversed. Reading the Georgia Restrictive Covenants Act as a whole, the Court held that the statute does not require every restrictive covenant to state an express geographic term to be potentially reasonable. The covenant must still satisfy the Act’s reasonableness requirements, including the limits on time, geographic area, and prohibited activities. The Court directed the Court of Appeals to reverse the trial court’s judgment and remand for assessment of the restrictions under that standard. It disapproved inconsistent precedent.