Executive Summary: Key Legal and Evidentiary Issues

• Antoine Poirier resigned from Manulift on May 21, 2026, and simultaneously accepted a position as Assistant General Manager at Girouard Équipement, a competitor.
• His employment contract contained non-competition, non-solicitation, confidentiality, and document-return clauses.
• Both the non-competition and non-solicitation clauses appeared prima facie overbroad in territorial scope and duration, making Manulift's apparent right doubtful at this stage.
• Notwithstanding the doubtful validity, the court found a serious risk of irreparable harm justifying provisional relief.
• Prior to the hearing, Poirier returned the confidential documents and materials in his possession, as identified in exhibit P-8.
• Only Antoine Poirier and 9108-1802 Québec inc. (Girouard Équipement) were subject to the provisional injunction; the other defendants were not.

Facts of the case

Manulift E.M.I. ltée ("Manulift") is a company whose activities involve the sale, rental, and distribution of telescopic equipment. Antoine Poirier had been employed by Manulift and, on or around May 22, 2019, signed a new employment contract following his promotion to the position of Territory Manager – Agricultural, effective June 3, 2019. In that role, Poirier had access to Manulift's strategic and confidential information and documents. On or around May 21, 2026, Poirier submitted his resignation to Manulift, effective the same day, citing new professional opportunities. At the same time, he admitted to Manulift that he had accepted a position as Assistant General Manager at Girouard Équipement (operated by 9108-1802 Québec inc.), and that he had been in negotiations with that company for several months. He was scheduled to begin work for Girouard Équipement on June 8, 2026. Manulift brought an application for a provisional interlocutory injunction before the Superior Court of Québec, District of Québec.

Contractual clauses at issue

Poirier's employment contract contained several restrictive covenants. The non-competition clause (clause 7) prohibited him, during and for a defined period after his employment, from directly or indirectly engaging in activities identical, similar, or connected to those of Manulift, within a defined territory. For Territory Managers, the applicable non-competition period was 24 months. The contract also recognized that a violation would cause irreparable harm to Manulift not compensable in money. The non-solicitation clause (clause 8.1) likewise ran for 24 months post-employment and barred Poirier from soliciting Manulift's clients or employees, or assisting others in doing so. The document-return clause (clause 13) required Poirier to immediately return all documents and materials belonging to Manulift upon termination, with a stipulated damages provision for non-compliance ranging from $5,000 to $20,000 depending on the applicable checkbox selected in the contract.

Court's reasoning and analysis

The court applied the four criteria for a provisional injunction: urgency, apparent right (apparence de droit), serious or irreparable harm, and balance of inconveniences. Urgency was not seriously contested by the defendants. On the non-competition clause, the court noted it appeared very broad in terms of territory, duration, and prohibited activities, making Manulift's apparent right doubtful. Nevertheless, the court found it necessary to treat the clause as provisionally valid and concluded there was a serious possibility that its violation could create a situation that a final judgment would not be able to remedy, given the interests Manulift sought to protect. The same analysis applied to the non-solicitation clause, which also appeared overbroad on its face. The court further noted that, regardless of the clause's validity, Poirier remained bound under Article 2085 of the Civil Code of Québec to act with loyalty and honesty for some time after the termination of his employment, and that unlawful solicitation of clients could, in all likelihood, create an irreparable situation. As for confidentiality and document return, Poirier had returned the relevant documents before the hearing, and Manulift's counsel agreed at the hearing to limit the confidentiality obligation, for the time being, to the items identified in exhibit P-8.

Ruling and overall outcome

The court granted Manulift's application and issued a provisional injunction for a period of ten (10) days against Antoine Poirier and 9108-1802 Québec inc. (Girouard Équipement). Poirier was ordered to cease all competitive activity against Manulift — including working for Girouard Équipement — and to refrain from soliciting Manulift's clients or employees. Girouard Équipement was ordered not to employ Poirier during that period. Both defendants were further ordered to cease using or copying the confidential information identified in exhibit P-8 and to return all remaining Manulift documents within 48 hours, without making copies or communicating them to third parties. The court ordered Manulift to post a security bond of $7,000 — corresponding to the salary Poirier would have received from Girouard Équipement over the following three weeks — in favor of Antoine Poirier. No costs were awarded. Manulift was the successful party on the injunction application; however, given the provisional and time-limited nature of the order, the ultimate validity of the restrictive covenants remains to be determined by the trial judge.