The moving defendants sought a stay of an Ontario action arising from cancelled purchase orders for custom fiber optic components, arguing the dispute belonged in Oregon.
Applying the Van Breda framework, the court held there was a sufficient real and substantial connection to Ontario because the goods were manufactured in Ottawa, the business relationship involved regular attendance in Ontario to monitor production, and payment obligations ran to the Ontario manufacturer.
The court further held the defendants failed to establish forum non conveniens, noting the limited weight of witness-location concerns in the era of virtual testimony, the absence of competing Oregon proceedings, and the lack of demonstrated prejudice from litigating in Ontario.
The stay motion was dismissed and the responding plaintiff received partial indemnity costs.
