The plaintiff, Savanta Inc., and co-defendant GEI Consultants, Inc. (GEI), brought a motion to stay portions of the defendants' counterclaim and for Savanta to discontinue parts of its statement of claim.
The motion was based on a forum selection clause in a Share Purchase Agreement (SPA) that Savanta argued required disputes to be adjudicated in Massachusetts.
The defendants, Thomas and Teresa Hilditch, contended that Savanta had attorned to the jurisdiction of the Ontario Superior Court.
The court found the SPA's jurisdiction clause to be "non-exclusive," meaning it did not preclude Ontario from adjudicating the disputes.
Applying the Muscutt factors for forum non conveniens, the court determined that Ontario was the most convenient forum for all issues, emphasizing the risk of multiplicity of proceedings and conflicting decisions if the matters were split between Ontario and Massachusetts.
The motion to stay or discontinue was denied, and the plaintiff and GEI were ordered to pay costs to the defendants.
