2 total
Successful defendants received $10,000 partial indemnity costs payable forthwith.
This was a costs decision following dismissal of an interlocutory injunction motion brought against former employees and their new competing company.
The successful defendants sought substantial indemnity costs and relief from the usual offsetting treatment of cross-examination costs under rule 39.02(4)(b).
The court held there was no egregious litigation conduct justifying substantial indemnity costs, but exercised its discretion to award the defendants all of their reasonable partial indemnity costs, including cross-examination costs without offset.
Costs were fixed at $10,000 all inclusive, payable forthwith.
Interlocutory injunction denied against former employees competing with their previous employer.
The plaintiff sought an interlocutory injunction restraining two former employees and their new company from providing services to two major customers for one year.
The plaintiff alleged that a former project manager was a fiduciary employee who breached fiduciary duties by competing with the company and that another employee knowingly assisted the breach.
Applying the three‑part test from RJR‑MacDonald, the court held that the plaintiff failed to establish a strong prima facie case that the employee was a fiduciary or that any solicitation of customers occurred.
The court also found insufficient evidence of irreparable harm and determined that the balance of convenience favoured the defendants, particularly given the impact on the defendants’ ability to earn a livelihood.
The motion for an interlocutory injunction was therefore dismissed.
