In Motoretta v. Twist & Go Power Sports, the Plaintiff and Defendant are two rival GTA scooter stores, engaged in what the Judge called the “Toronto Scooter Wars”. The Defendant’s Vespa dealership was terminated by the Canadian Vespa distributor. The Plaintiff remained an authorized Vespa dealer. The Plaintiff was suspicious that the Defendant had “bad-mouthed” it to customers on an ongoing basis. In response, the Plaintiff hired private investigators to pose as customers at the Defendant’s store. The private investigators recorded their conversations with the Defendant, which the Plaintiff alleged were defamatory. The Plaintiff scooter store brought an action for damages for defamation, and for a permanent injunction prohibiting the Defendant from further defaming the Plaintiff. The action was determined by summary judgment. The Judge found that the Defendant’s statements to the private investigators had defamed the Plaintiff. The Defendant argued that the statements did not meet the legal test of defamation because … Read More
Court of Appeal Defines Key Terms Relating to Injunctions
In 1711811 Ontario Ltd. (AdLine) v. Buckley Insurance Brokers Ltd. a dispute arose between the parties regarding access to a laneway, resulting in three Court endorsements referring to “interim”, “interlocutory”, “permanent”, and “mandatory” injunctive relief. The Court of Appeal took the opportunity to clarify these key terms relating to injunctions: Interim injunction: Pre-trial relief, which may be sought with or without notice to the other party. Argument in an interim injunction proceeding is usually brief. The injunction is typically for a short, defined period of time. Interlocutory injunction: Pre-trial relief, again restraining a party for a limited period of time, but often for longer than an interim injunction (such as until trial or other disposition of the action). Argument in an interlocutory injunction proceeding is typically lengthier than in an interim injunction proceeding, and involves both parties. The test for an interlocutory injunction is set out in in RJR-MacDonald, and recognizes that the Court does not have the ability … Read More
Court Grants Interim Injunction Against Neighbour
The recent Ontario Superior Court of Justice decision in Sciara v. Szpakowski, 2014 ONSC 2157, involved a dispute between neighbours over the right to use a lane between the two houses. The lane was owned by the Respondent but the Applicants allege that they were allowed continuous use of the lane to access their backyard for many years. When the neighbours had an argument over another matter, the Respondent threatened to construct a fence to restrict the Applicants’ access to the lane. The Applicants sought an interim injunction restricting the Respondent from constructing a fence until their application for prescriptive easement over the lane was heard. In determining whether an interim injunction should be granted, the Court applied the test outlined by the Supreme Court of Canada in RJR-MacDonald Inc. v. Canada (Attorney General), [1994] 1 S.C.R. 311, which was as follows: (i) is there a serious question to be determined, (ii) … Read More