An injunction is a court order requiring a party to do, or stop doing, something. To obtain one, you must generally show a serious question to be tried, that you will suffer irreparable harm if it is not granted, and that the balance of convenience favours granting it. Urgent motions can sometimes be heard within days, and in truly urgent cases, without notice to the other side for up to 10 days under Rule 40.02. You will typically need to provide an undertaking as to damages.
- The legal test has three parts: a serious question to be tried, irreparable harm, and the balance of convenience.
- Irreparable harm means harm that money damages could not adequately compensate — not simply serious harm.
- A without-notice (ex parte) motion can be brought for genuinely urgent matters, but is limited to 10 days under Rule 40.02 and requires full and fair disclosure to the court.
- You will typically need to provide an undertaking as to damages — a promise to compensate the other side if the injunction turns out to have been wrongly granted.
- Motion materials generally include a notice of motion and supporting affidavits, filed and served as urgently as the circumstances require.
- Injunctions are an equitable remedy only available in the Superior Court of Justice, not Small Claims Court.
What Is an Injunction?
An injunction is a court order requiring a party to do, or stop doing, something — as opposed to an award of money damages after the fact. It is used precisely because money would not fully undo the harm if the court waited until a full trial to act. See our injunction services page for how we approach these matters, including emergency motions.
The Three-Part Legal Test
Ontario courts apply a three-part test before granting an injunction:
- A serious question to be tried. You do not need to prove you will ultimately win — only that there is a genuine legal issue, not a frivolous or hopeless claim.
- Irreparable harm. Harm that money damages could not adequately compensate for — loss of a unique asset, permanent reputational or relationship damage, or disclosure of information that cannot be undone.
- Balance of convenience. Weighing the harm to you if the injunction is refused against the harm to the other side if it is granted.
Most contested injunction motions turn on whether the harm is truly irreparable, or whether it could ultimately be compensated with money — even if the amount would be significant.
Without-Notice (Ex Parte) Motions
For the most urgent situations, Rule 40.02(1) of the Rules of Civil Procedure allows a motion to be brought without notifying the other side first, for a period not exceeding 10 days. This is reserved for circumstances where notifying the other party would defeat the purpose of the order — for example, warning someone in advance that you are seeking to freeze assets they might otherwise move or dissipate.
A party seeking a without-notice order must disclose all material facts to the court — including facts that do not help their case. Failing to do so can result in the order being set aside, with real cost consequences.
The Undertaking as to Damages
Courts typically require the party seeking an injunction to provide an undertaking as to damages — a formal promise to compensate the other side for losses caused by the injunction if it later turns out the order should not have been granted. This is real financial exposure and should be weighed carefully before bringing an urgent motion.
Common Uses in Business Disputes
- Stopping a departing employee or partner from breaching a non-compete or misusing confidential information
- Freezing assets before they can be dissipated ahead of a judgment
- Pausing a closing or transaction while an underlying dispute over the deal is resolved
- Preventing continued interference with a business relationship or contract
A former partner in an Ontario business begins contacting clients using confidential customer lists taken from the partnership before a formal exit was negotiated. Given the risk that client relationships could be permanently lost, an urgent motion for an injunction — potentially without notice, given the risk of further immediate harm — is used to stop the conduct while the underlying partnership dispute proceeds.
What to Expect
- Urgent assessment. We evaluate whether the three-part test is realistically met, and how urgent the timeline truly is.
- Motion materials. A notice of motion and supporting affidavits are prepared, often within a compressed timeframe.
- Service and filing. Materials are served and filed as urgently as the circumstances require — same day, where necessary.
- The hearing. Both sides (or, on a without-notice motion, just the moving party initially) present argument, and the judge decides.
If you are facing imminent, irreparable harm, call our Ontario injunction lawyers immediately at 416-274-2222.
Frequently Asked Questions
The three-part test: a serious question to be tried (not necessarily a guaranteed win, but a genuine legal issue), that you will suffer irreparable harm without the order, and that the balance of convenience — weighing the harm to each side — favours granting it.
Harm that cannot be adequately remedied by money damages later — such as the loss of a unique asset, permanent damage to a business relationship or reputation, or disclosure of confidential information that cannot be undone once released. Harm that is simply serious, but fully compensable with money, generally does not qualify.
Urgent motions can sometimes be scheduled within days of filing, and in truly urgent circumstances, a without-notice motion can be brought even faster — sometimes within the same day, though this is reserved for genuine emergencies.
Under Rule 40.02, a court can grant an injunction without notifying the other side first, for a period not exceeding 10 days, where circumstances truly justify it. The moving party must make full and fair disclosure to the court, including facts that may not help their own position — failing to do so can result in the order being set aside.
A promise, usually required as a condition of obtaining an injunction, to compensate the other side for losses caused by the injunction if it turns out the order should not have been granted. Courts take this seriously, and it is a real financial exposure to weigh before seeking urgent relief.
Potentially, yes — injunctions are commonly used in business disputes to prevent a departing partner or employee from breaching a non-compete, to stop a party from dissipating assets before judgment, or to pause a closing or sale while a dispute is resolved.
Cost varies with urgency and complexity, but expect a meaningfully higher cost than a routine motion given the compressed timeline and the affidavit evidence required. We discuss likely cost upfront given the emergency nature of these matters.