During a lawful strike at the plaintiff’s manufacturing facility, the employer sought variation of a prior court order governing picketing and requested an injunction against certain strike activities.
Evidence showed incidents of delay, intimidation, and obstruction at the picket line, including targeted delays of supervisory staff and confrontations with delivery vehicles and bus passengers.
The court emphasized that picketing is constitutionally protected expressive activity but may be limited where unlawful conduct occurs.
Applying the modified interlocutory injunction test for labour disputes, the court held that the threshold requirement of demonstrating unsuccessful reasonable efforts to obtain police assistance had not been met.
The injunction was denied, but the court varied earlier orders to simplify wait‑time rules, expand the pedestrian corridor for bus passengers, and clarify police enforcement obligations.
