Gerald J. Griffiths

The plaintiff transportation brokerage sought an interlocutory injunction to enforce a non-solicitation clause against former employees who resigned to join a competitor.

The court applied the RJR-MacDonald test, requiring a strong prima facie case because the injunction would restrict the defendants' ability to earn a living.

The court found the non-solicitation clause was likely too broad in duration and scope, and the departing employee was not a fiduciary.

The motion for an injunction was dismissed, but the court declined to award costs to the successful defendants due to their flagrant disregard for the spirit of the employment agreement and inappropriate handling of confidential information.

The applicant requested to re-activate his deferred human rights application after the Canadian Human Rights Commission (CHRC) dismissed his identical complaint.

The Tribunal had previously deferred the application on the condition that it could be re-activated if the CHRC declined jurisdiction on federal/provincial grounds.

Because the CHRC accepted jurisdiction and dismissed the complaint on its merits, the Tribunal found it had no jurisdiction over the matter.

The request to re-activate was denied and the application was dismissed.

The applicant, a taxi driver, alleged discrimination by the respondents for prohibiting him and other drivers from accessing the washrooms at the Billy Bishop Toronto City Airport's Passenger Transfer Facility.

The respondents requested dismissal on the basis that the matter falls under federal jurisdiction.

Noting that the applicant had filed an identical complaint with the Canadian Human Rights Commission (CHRC), the Tribunal declined to dismiss the Application on jurisdictional grounds at this stage and instead deferred the Application pending the conclusion of the CHRC proceeding.

The applicant, a taxi driver, filed a human rights application alleging discrimination after the respondents banned taxi drivers from using the washrooms at the Billy Bishop Toronto City Airport passenger transfer facility.

The respondents requested early dismissal, arguing the facility is a federal undertaking subject to exclusive federal jurisdiction over aeronautics and navigation.

The Tribunal noted the applicant had also filed a complaint with the Canadian Human Rights Commission and ordered the parties to provide updates on that process to determine whether deferral is appropriate, with a preliminary hearing on jurisdiction to follow if necessary.