Today the Supreme Court released its decision in Google Inc v Equustek Solutions Inc, 2017 SCC 34. This is a groundbreaking decision as the Court confirmed the availability of worldwide injunctions.
Justin Safayeni and Carlo Di Carlo represented the British Columbia Civil Liberties Association at this appeal. They argued that worldwide injunctions should be available where necessary to prevent irreparable harm and allow plaintiffs meaningful access to justice, but that such orders should be made cautiously and only where their salutary effects outweigh any harm to the right to free expression.
The case arises from a claim brought against a defendant who was unlawfully misappropriating the plaintiff’s intellectual property to create a competing product. The plaintiff obtained a number of interim orders requiring the defendant to stop its infringing conduct, but was having difficulty enforcing these orders on account of the fact that the defendant would move objectionable content to different websites. The plaintiff moved for an interlocutory injunction to prohibit Google from including websites related to the defendant. The motion judge granted the injunction and the British Columbia Court of Appeal upheld this decision. Google appealed to the Supreme Court.
The Supreme Court’s decision to deny Google’s appeal is significant as it established that Canadian courts have the jurisdiction to issue injunctions with a global scope. A key consideration for the Court was that the worldwide scope of the injunction was necessary to ensure its effectiveness. Given the nature of internet-based businesses, it would otherwise be easy for the target of an injunction to escape its reach.
