November 30, 2024 (2024 ONSC 6696)

• Issue: Purolator sought an ex parte interim injunction to stop picketing that blocked its facility.
• Court's Findings:
  • The picketing, conducted by individuals not employed by Purolator, caused delays of 15-31 minutes per vehicle.
  • This disruption significantly impacted deliveries, including time-sensitive medical and pharmaceutical shipments.
  • The court found secondary picketing at Purolator's facility was unlawful, as it obstructed entry and exit, constituting nuisance and potentially breaching the Criminal Code.
  • Injunction Granted: Prohibited picketers from obstructing access or egress. Purolator had to provide notice to the Canadian Union of Postal Workers (CUPW).

December 6, 2024 (2024 ONSC 6812)

• Review of Injunction:
  • CUPW contested the earlier injunction, arguing it was connected to a labour dispute under section 102 of the Courts of Justice Act.
  • Court's Analysis:
    • Determined Purolator was not a party to the labour dispute between CUPW and Canada Post, which owns 91% of Purolator. Thus, section 102 did not apply.
    • The court reaffirmed the injunction based on evidence of substantial harm caused by the picketing.
    • Allowed CUPW to conduct informational picketing in a designated area at Purolator's premises but barred any obstruction of operations.

Outcome Based on Both Decisions:

• The injunction was upheld but modified to balance Purolator’s operational rights and CUPW’s freedom of expression.
• Purolator received its requested relief, with an additional condition to allow informational picketing in specified areas.

This resolution reflects a compromise, emphasizing lawful expression while preventing operational interference. No monetary damages were awarded in either decision.