People Corporation v 2578649 Alberta Ltd. (Quinn Advisory Group)
2578649 Alberta Ltd. dba Quinn Advisory Group
Law Firm / Organization
McCarthy Tétrault LLP
Jay Quinn
Law Firm / Organization
McCarthy Tétrault LLP
Tyler Patterson
Law Firm / Organization
McCarthy Tétrault LLP
Selina Metez
Law Firm / Organization
McCarthy Tétrault LLP
Margaret Archer
Law Firm / Organization
McCarthy Tétrault LLP

Background:

  • People Corporation acquired Lane Quinn Benefit Consultants Ltd. (LQBC) in 2018, with key principals, including Jay Quinn, signing restrictive covenants.
  • The restrictive covenants governed confidentiality, non-solicitation, and non-competition, with varying expiration dates.
  • Post-acquisition, employees, including Quinn, worked for People until resigning between December 2023 and early 2024 to join Quinn Advisory Group (QAG).

Claims:

  • People Corporation alleges breaches of restrictive covenants, including soliciting clients, employees, and misuse of confidential information.
  • The primary legal focus is the enforceability of the covenants under contract and common law.

Court Analysis:

  1. Restrictive Covenants:

    • Many covenants were deemed overbroad or ambiguous, especially definitions of "Clients" and "Prospective Clients," making them unenforceable.
    • The Court found insufficient evidence of direct solicitation of clients or employees by Jay Quinn.
    • Non-solicitation and confidentiality provisions had to meet high enforceability standards due to their employment context.
  2. Injunction Requests:

    • Limited injunctions were granted only against Tyler Patterson, based on potential fiduciary duty and proven client solicitations.
    • No injunctions were issued against Quinn, Selina Metez, or Margaret Archer due to lack of strong prima facie evidence or enforceable covenants.
  3. Harm and Balance:

    • The Court ruled that damages were quantifiable, negating claims of irreparable harm.
    • Balance of convenience favored the defendants, except for the limited order on Patterson.

Outcome:

The Court rejected most of the requested injunctions but imposed a temporary restriction on Patterson’s client solicitations until February 2025. Costs are to be determined if parties cannot agree.

The decision did not specify any monetary damages awarded

Court of King's Bench of Alberta
2401 05026
Employment law
Respondent