D. Van Sickle

The applicant siblings sought an order for the partition and sale of a property they co-owned equally with the respondent sibling.

The respondent, who resided at the property rent-free, did not respond to the application.

Finding no evidence of malicious, vexatious, or oppressive conduct by the applicants, the court granted the order for sale.

The court also ordered the respondent to deliver vacant possession to allow the property to be cleaned, staged, and sold for maximum value, and awarded costs to the applicants.

The plaintiff sought an interlocutory injunction enforcing restrictive covenants in a license agreement with a former licensee operating a mobile sign business.

After the agreement expired, the former licensee allegedly solicited customers and attempted to continue operating under a competing company within the restricted geographic area.

Applying the test from RJR‑MacDonald Inc. v. Canada, the court found a strong prima facie case that the restrictive covenant was enforceable and had been breached.

The court also found that the diversion of customers and misuse of the plaintiff’s trade name would cause irreparable harm to goodwill and business relations, and that the balance of convenience favoured protection of the plaintiff’s business.

An interim injunction was granted restraining the defendant from operating a competing mobile sign business within the restricted area and from soliciting the plaintiff’s customers pending further review.