THE CANADIAN EMPLOYEE COMPETITION BLOG

Canada’s big five banks and the financial planning industry will benefit by paying close attention to the difference between a “loyalty incentive” and a restraint of trade, as canvassed thoroughly by the Ontario Superior Court in Levinsky v. The Toronto-Dominion Bank, 2013 ONSC 5657. Levinsky, a managing director with TD Securities Inc.,…

One of the most-used strategies to argue that a non-compete or non-solicit provision is unenforceable is to point to any possible ambiguity in the wording used. In the leading Canadian decision, the Supreme Court of Canada held in J.G. Collins Insurance Agencies Ltd. v. Elsley Estate, 1978 CanLII 7 (SCC), that in order…

The B.C. Court of Appeal’ decision last year in Rhebergen v. Creston Veterinary Clinic, 2014 BCCA 97, is both a win and a loss for employers seeking to restrain employees from competing with them post-employment. In both instances, the decision will have long-reaching effects over employer’s strategies to implement effective restraints and the…

As predicted earlier in this space, the British Columbia Court of Appeal’s decision in Edward Jones v. Voldeng, 2012 BCCA 295, is making it very difficult to enforce a non-solicit agreement in B.C. on an interim basis pending trial. In Hub International v. Redcliffe, 2012 BCSC 1280, one of the first decisions to apply Edward Jones,…

The British Columbia Court of Appeal has raised the bar considerably for employers hoping to obtain an injunction to enforce a non-solicit clause pending trial. In Edward Jones v. Voldeng, 2012 BCCA 295, released July 3, 2012, the court held that Edward Jones, a securities firm that sought to enforce a six-month…

Word out of Alberta that the plaintiff company in Globex Foreign Exchange Corporation v. Kelcher, 2011 ABCA 240, will not be appealing the Alberta Court of Appeal decision to the Supreme Court of Canada. That’s too bad for those of us who had hoped for some clarification from the nation’s top…