The defendant brought a motion to stay or dismiss the plaintiffs' action, arguing that Ontario lacked jurisdiction simpliciter, that a forum selection clause mandated disputes be heard in British Columbia, or alternatively, that British Columbia was the more convenient forum.
The plaintiffs had sued for the right to exercise stock options under a consulting relationship.
The court found that Ontario had jurisdiction simpliciter because the consulting agreement was formed in Ontario.
The court declined to enforce the forum selection clause, finding it was not properly incorporated by reference into the stock option agreement and the plaintiffs were not given adequate notice of it.
Finally, the court held that the defendant failed to establish that British Columbia was clearly the more convenient forum.
The motion was dismissed.