The plaintiff sought an interlocutory injunction restraining the defendant from reverting to an earlier commission structure under a commercial sales and service arrangement.
The court held that the plaintiff established a strong prima facie case that a 2020 amending agreement was binding despite the absence of signatures, based on objective intention, ostensible authority, and the parties' conduct in performing the amended terms for over two years.
The court further found a meaningful risk of irreparable harm because the plaintiff faced collapse of its cash flow, loss of workforce, employment contract breaches, and potential business failure if the lower commission model remained in place.
The balance of convenience favoured the plaintiff because any loss to the defendant was compensable in damages.
The injunction was granted, conditional on a sworn undertaking as to damages.
