Following a finding that the defendant breached its duty of good faith by refusing to allow the plaintiff to exercise stock options, the court had to determine the appropriate remedy.
The parties' experts disagreed on whether Quebec law required specific performance or damages.
The court appointed an independent expert, former SCC Justice Louis LeBel, who concluded that specific performance was the appropriate remedy under Quebec law.
The court rejected the defendant's argument that Ontario law should apply as the lex fori, finding that the choice of remedy was substantive and governed by the lex causae (Quebec law).
The plaintiff was awarded specific performance and partial indemnity costs.
