Interim Injunction — Ontario Employment Law
Related Keywords
About Interim Injunction
In Ontario employment law, an interim injunction is a temporary, emergency court order that compels a party to either do something or stop doing something until a full trial can take place. Because employment litigation can take years to resolve, these urgent orders are designed to prevent catastrophic, irreversible damage in the meantime.
Most commonly, interim injunctions are sought by employers attempting to stop a former employee from breaching a restrictive covenant, such as a non-competition or non-solicitation clause, or to prevent the misuse of confidential information. While less common, employees can also seek interim injunctions. For example, an employee might ask a court to halt a mandatory retirement policy to preserve their employment while an age discrimination claim under the fixed terms of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms or the Ontario Human Rights Code is being litigated.
Ontario courts do not grant interim injunctions lightly, as they severely impact a person's ability to earn a living or run a business before a final legal decision is made. To obtain this temporary order, the applicant must satisfy a strict three-part legal test established under common law.
First, there must be a 'serious issue to be tried'—though when an employer aims to enforce a restrictive covenant like a non-compete, the standard is elevated; they must demonstrate a 'strong prima facie case' that the contract is legally enforceable. Second, the applicant must prove they will suffer 'irreparable harm' if the injunction is not granted. Irreparable harm means damage that cannot be fixed simply by paying money later, such as a permanent loss of market share or the destruction of a company's reputation. Finally, the court weighs the 'balance of convenience,' determining which party would suffer greater harm from the granting or refusing of the temporary order.
Because seeking or defending against emergency court motions involves rapid deadlines and complex evidentiary burdens, handling these matters alone is incredibly risky. The outcome of a motion for an interim injunction often dictates the result of the entire dispute, meaning swift consultation with a qualified Ontario workplace lawyer is a critical first step to protecting your legal interests.
Frequently Asked Questions
What is the difference between an interim injunction and a permanent injunction?
An interim injunction is a temporary, pre-trial order meant to stabilize a situation and prevent immediate harm while a lawsuit is ongoing. A permanent injunction is a final order granted at the end of a trial, permanently restricting a party's actions as part of the formal court judgment.
What does 'irreparable harm' mean in an employment dispute?
Under Ontario law, irreparable harm refers to damage that cannot be adequately compensated with a financial payout at a later trial. In the workplace context, this often includes permanent loss of key clients, destruction of business goodwill, or public exposure of highly sensitive trade secrets.
Can my former employer get an interim injunction just because I signed a non-compete agreement?
No. The presence of a signed contract is not enough on its own. The employer must convince a judge that they have a strong case that the specific clause is reasonable and enforceable, that they will face irreparable harm, and that the balance of convenience favours shutting down your new employment pending a trial.
Are interim injunctions ever used to protect employees?
Yes, although they are far less common than employer-led injunctions. An employee might successfully seek an interim injunction to keep their job pending the outcome of a significant legal challenge, such as fighting a discriminatory mandatory retirement policy.
How quickly can a court issue this type of temporary order?
Interim injunctions are treated as urgent matters and can be heard by an Ontario judge in a matter of weeks, or sometimes even days if the threat is severe and immediate. Under extreme circumstances of fraud or data theft, they can initially be granted without notice to the other party.
Do I need to hire an employment lawyer if I am served with motion materials for an injunction?
Absolutely. The timelines for responding to an injunction motion are incredibly tight, and failing to mount a proper defense could result in a court order that temporarily bans you from working in your industry or operating your new business.
Common Scenarios
- A dental associate resigns from a local clinic and immediately opens a competing practice two kilometers away, prompting the former clinic to seek an urgent interim injunction to enforce a 15-kilometre, three-year non-competition clause.
- A senior sales executive downloads a proprietary client database to a personal hard drive before leaving for a rival tech company, leading the former employer to rush to court to stop them from utilizing the stolen data before a full trial.
- A fleet supervisor facing a mandatory retirement policy at age 65 applies for a temporary court order to maintain their active employment status while pursuing a constitutional age discrimination challenge against the employer.
- A former employee starts a competing logistics venture and courts their previous employer's staff, but the employer's request for an interim injunction is denied by a judge because they fail to prove actual irreparable financial harm.
What You Should Know
- If you are served with notice of an interim injunction application, do not ignore it—retain legal representation immediately, as you may only have a few days to file opposing sworn affidavits.
- Before resigning to join a competitor, have a professional review your employment contract to assess whether your employer has a strong enough case to attempt an injunction against you.
- Employers seeking an injunction should gather robust documentary evidence showing actual lost business or data theft; judges will not grant emergency orders based on mere suspicion or generalized fear.
- Keep in mind that if you successfully obtain an interim injunction but ultimately lose at the final trial, you may be ordered to compensate the other party for the income they lost while the temporary order was in place.
Featured Cases
Downtown Kids Academy Inc. v. Zakrzewski
2017 ONSC 5045 (CanLII) · 2017-08-25Non-Solicitation Clause Dispute: Interim Injunction Denial
A former employee launched a competing business and allegedly solicited employees and clients of her former employer. The court considered whether an interim injunction should be granted to enforce the non-solicitation clause, ultimately denying the injunction due to a lack of evidence of irreparable harm.
FLS Transportation Services Inc. v Charger Logistics Inc.
2016 ONSC 3652 (CanLII) · 2016-06-01Restrictive Covenants: Court Dismisses Motion for Interim Injunction
A court case involving restrictive covenants in employment contracts where the plaintiff sought an interim injunction to prevent former employees from working for a competitor. The court dismissed the motion due to insufficient evidence of a strong prima facie case and failure to establish irreparable harm or balance of convenience.
Nakina Forest Products v. United Steelworkers Local 1-2693
2006 CanLII 26169 (ON SC) · 2006-08-01Labour Dispute: Interim Injunction Application
A labour dispute case involving an application for an interim injunction.
Wilde v. Welland (City)
2006 CanLII 21074 (ON SC) · 2006-06-22Age Discrimination: Interim Injunction Allows Employee to Remain Employed Beyond 65
A wrongful dismissal and age discrimination case where an employee, employed as Fleet Supervisor, sought to remain employed beyond age 65 despite the respondent's policy of retirement at 65. The court granted an interim injunction to allow the applicant to remain employed pending appeal, citing the balance of convenience and the serious constitutional issue of age discrimination under Section 15(1) of the Charter.
Dr. Jack Newton Dentistry Professional Corporation v. Towell
2005 CanLII 37351 (ON SC) · 2005-10-17Non-Competition Clause Enforcement in Dental Employment Agreement
A case involving the interpretation and enforcement of non-competition clauses in an employment agreement between a dental practice and an associate. The court determined that the non-competition clause in the offer to purchase remained valid and enforceable, and found the vendor in breach of the restrictive covenant. An interim injunction was granted to prevent the vendor from practicing within a 15-kilometre radius for three years.
Robert Half Canada Inc. v. Jeewan
2004 CanLII 1532 (ON SC) · 2004-03-05Non-Competition Clause Injunction: Without-Notice Motion in Employment Dispute
A labour and employment case involving a plaintiff seeking an interim injunction without notice to restrain former employees from competing or soliciting. The court examined whether the plaintiff was justified in proceeding without notice and whether the injunction should be extended, considering the rules on without-notice motions and the duty of full and frank disclosure.
Stevenson v. Air Canada
1981 CanLII 4354 (ON SC) · 1981-08-31Age Discrimination: Injunction Prevents Air Canada Mandatory Retirement
A merits decision involving a challenge to a mandatory retirement policy at Air Canada, alleging age discrimination under the Canadian Human Rights Act. The court considered whether the collective agreement provision violates human rights and whether an interim injunction should be granted to prevent enforcement of the policy pending resolution by the Canadian Human Rights Commission.
Stevenson v. Air Canada
1981 CanLII 2883 (ON SC) · 1981-08-17Mandatory Retirement Discrimination: Pilot Challenges Air Canada Policy
A pilot sought an interim injunction to prevent Air Canada from enforcing a mandatory retirement at age 60, pending a determination under the Canadian Human Rights Act. The case examines whether the collective agreement provision violates human rights protections, particularly regarding age discrimination, and balances individual rights with collective agreement terms.
Re York University Faculty Association et al. and Board of Governors of York University et al.
1979 CanLII 1868 (ON SC) · 1979-12-13Faculty Appointment Dispute: Collective Agreement Breach and Injunction Application
A merits decision involving a dispute over whether the University president had the authority to appoint a faculty member without formal competition, in breach of a collective agreement. The Faculty Association sought an interim injunction pending arbitration, but the application was dismissed due to lack of jurisdiction and insufficient evidence of prejudice.
Capitol Records -- EMI of Canada Ltd. v. Gosewich et al.
1977 CanLII 1333 (ON SC) · 1977-11-22Employment Contract: Restrictive Covenants and Injunction Denied
An employment contract dispute involving restrictive covenants, where the employer sought an interim injunction to prevent a former executive from working for a competitor. The court denied the injunction due to lack of evidence of actual or imminent breach and the potential undue restraint on the employee’s livelihood.
Dominion Auto Transit Co. Ltd. v. Cowle et al.
1974 CanLII 701 (ON SC) · 1974-08-15Labour Dispute: Secondary Picketing and Interim Injunction Granted
A merits decision involving a labour dispute over secondary picketing, where employees of one company picketed a third-party company's premises without any direct relationship or bargaining dispute. The court examined whether the plaintiff was entitled to relief for unlawful interference with its operations and interpreted the meaning of 'labour dispute' under the Judicature Act. The court granted an interim injunction due to irreparable harm caused by the picketing.
International Alliance of Theatrical Stage Employees, Local 58 v. Canadian Broadcasting Corporation
1971 CanLII 564 (ON SC) · 1971-06-03Trade Union Interim Injunction Dismissed: Procedural Deficiencies
A trade union applied for an interim injunction against the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation, alleging the employer failed to employ union members for production work. The application was dismissed due to procedural and substantive deficiencies, including the inability of the trade union to be a legal entity capable of initiating suits.
Management Recruiters of Toronto Ltd. v. Bagg
1970 CanLII 528 (ON SC) · 1970-06-29Employment Contract: Covenant Not to Compete and Confidentiality Dispute
An employment contract case involving a covenant not to compete and confidentiality obligations. The employee was terminated and joined a competitor, leading to disputes over the enforceability of the non-compete clause and the use of confidential information. The court denied an interim injunction to enforce the covenant not to compete but granted one to restrain the use of confidential information.
Orville Kerr Ltd. v. Dewitt
1969 CanLII 884 (ON SC) · 1969-10-09Employment Contract: Restrictive Covenant Injunction Refused
An employment contract dispute involving a restrictive covenant prohibiting competition in a defined area. The plaintiff sought an interim injunction to prevent the defendant from breaching the covenant, but the court refused the injunction, finding insufficient evidence of irreparable harm and noting that damages could be calculated with reasonable accuracy.
SCM (Canada) Ltd. v. Motley et al.
1967 CanLII 274 (ON SC) · 1967-06-22Labour Dispute: Court Dismisses Injunction Motion Over Picketing During Strike
A merits decision involving a dispute over the lawful picketing during a strike, where the employer sought an interim injunction to limit the number of pickets. The court dismissed the motion, finding no evidence of obstruction, violence, or intimidation, and emphasized that interim injunctions require uncontradicted evidence.