Retail, Wholesale and Department Store Union, Local 580 v. Dolphin Delivery Ltd.
Canada Supreme Court
[1986] 2 S.C.R. 573, 33 D.L.R. 4th 174 (1986)
- Written by Curtis Parvin, JD
Facts
Purolator Courier Incorporated (Purolator) was engaged in a dispute with the union representing its workers in British Columbia, the Retail, Wholesale and Department Store Union, Local 580 (Local 580) (defendant). Dolphin Delivery Ltd. (Dolphin) (plaintiff) did business with Purolator. A different union represented Dolphin’s workers, but the collective-bargaining agreement between Dolphin and the other union allowed Dolphin’s workers to refuse to cross a picket line established by another union. When the Purolator-Local 580 dispute arose, Dolphin ceased doing business with Purolator but started doing business with an Ontario company, Supercourier Ltd. (Supercourier), associated with Purolator. Local 580 asserted that Dolphin and Supercourier were allies of Purolator, but the British Columbia Labor Relations Board (the board) rejected the claim. Local 580 then threatened to picket Dolphin to impact Purolator—known as secondary picketing. Dolphin successfully sought an injunction, with the court finding that Local 580’s secondary picketing was to induce a breach of contract and civil conspiracy to injure Dolphin and that Local 580’s rights to freedom of expression did not apply because the union intended to injure and not to communicate, given that Purolator was the actual opponent of Local 580. The appellate court agreed. Local 580 appealed to the Canada Supreme Court.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (McIntyre, J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 804,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,300 briefs, keyed to 988 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
- The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
- Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
- Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.