The plaintiffs and defendants were fertility doctors who worked together at a clinic for many years.
When the Ontario government announced public funding for fertility procedures, the defendant applied for and received funding for her new clinic, using historical data from both doctors' practices.
The plaintiff, who ultimately chose not to join the new clinic, sued for breach of fiduciary duty and unjust enrichment, claiming she was cut out of the funding.
The court dismissed the claims, finding no per se or ad hoc fiduciary duty existed, as the defendant did not undertake to forsake her own interests.
The court also found a juristic reason for any enrichment, as the plaintiff autonomously chose not to join the new clinic or negotiate an agreement to access the funding.
In the alternative, damages were assessed at $2,578,050.
