Mosaic Potash Esterhazy Limited Partnership v Potash Corporation of Saskatchewan Inc., 2011 SKCA 120

In Mosaic Potash Esterhazy Limited Partnership v. Potash Corporation of Saskatchewan Inc., Richards, J.A. clarified the law regarding the granting of interlocutory injunctions. He held that the proper approach to interlocutory injunction is flexible, and that the ultimate focus of the court must always be on the justice and equity of the situation at issue.

Potash Corporation of Saskatchewan ("PCS") was granted an interlocutory injunction against Mosaic Potash Esterhazy Limited ("Mosaic") that prevented Mosaic from discontinuing potash shipments to PCS. Mosaic contested the injunction claiming that the trial judge used an improper approach. Richards, J.A. reviewed Metropolitan Stores Ltd. v. Manitoba (Attorney General), the governing 1987 Supreme Court of Canada case on this point, in order to determine how the three tests or considerations identified in that case - strength of the case, the possibility of irreparable harm and the balance of convenience - operate in relation to one another. Richards, J.A. clarified that these three considerations are "not usefully seen as an inflexible straightjacket", but rather as providing a framework of interconnected tests in which justice and equity remain the Court's "ultimate focus".

Richards, J.A. proceeded to elaborate upon the proper approach to be taken in such cases. "Strength of the case" is a threshold issue in which the plaintiff must generally demonstrate that there is a serious issue to be tried. This general rule includes applications for mandatory relief. "Irreparable harm" is best seen as an aspect of the "balance of convenience." The standard of proof for irreparable harm is "meaningful doubt" as to the adequacy of damages. The "balance of convenience" consideration is usually at the core of the analysis and includes a range of equitable and other considerations. Richards, J.A. stressed that each aspect of this test is flexible and that the "overall equities and justice of the situation at hand" are the ultimate focus of the analysis.

October 24, 2011
Link to Decision

Kaitlind de Jong & Kai Sheffield
*