Labour Injunctions & Cease and Desist Orders in Ontario

[6]
obeyed police orders to allow vehicles to enter the company’s premises when the police were
called the requirement under section 102(3) that efforts to obtain police assistance be
unsuccessful had not been satisfied.
The Ontario Court of Appeal did not accept the union’s argument and dismissed the
appeal. In dismissing the appeal, the Court of Appeal clarified the purpose of section 102(3). It
stated: “The question posed by s. 102(3) is whether in all the circumstances reasonable efforts to
obtain police assistance have failed to result in an acceptable degree of control of the situation.” 14
The Court of Appeal also outlined what an applicant must prove under section 102(3) as follows:
the section places an onus on the applicant to satisfy the court that
the applicant has made reasonable efforts to obtain police
assistance and that those efforts have not resulted in an acceptable
degree of control in light of the factors set out in the section: the
risks of property damage, personal injury or obstruction of lawful
access to the premises. 15
With respect to the established pattern of picketing whereby picketers blocked vehicles from
entering and exiting the premises, the Court of Appeal found that the employer had established
that reasonable efforts to obtain police assistance had failed to result in an acceptable degree of
control as required under section 102(3). Section 102(3) does not contemplate that an employer
should have access to its premises blocked every day until the police arrive nor does it purport to
assess the success of police assistance in preventing obstruction only after the police have arrived
at the premises in question.
However, it should be noted that even though the Court of Appeal upheld the injunction,
in doing so, it commented that injunctions should be used sparingly in a labour relations context.
14 Industrial Hardwood, supra note 12 at para 23.
15 Ibid. at para 22.