The plaintiffs moved for an interlocutory injunction to prohibit the Independent Electricity System Operator (IESO) from enforcing the deemed terminations of 34 Feed-In Tariff (FIT) contracts and discontinuing payments.
The court found that the motion was an impermissible collateral attack on prior court orders that had deemed the contracts terminated.
Furthermore, the plaintiffs sought a mandatory injunction but failed to establish a strong prima facie case, as the issues of termination had been decided in prior litigation.
The court also found the plaintiffs' evidence of irreparable harm to be speculative.
The motion for an interlocutory injunction was dismissed.
