Not necessarily. Ontario Rule 40.01 of the Rules of Civil Procedure allows an interlocutory injunction or mandatory order to be sought by a party to a pending or intended proceeding. This means the underlying court proceeding does not always have to be fully underway before urgent injunctive relief is requested, but the injunction must be connected to a proceeding that already exists or is intended.
What does “pending or intended proceeding” mean?
A pending proceeding is one that has already been commenced.
An intended proceeding means the party seeking the injunction intends to pursue the underlying legal claim even though the proceeding may not yet have progressed through the ordinary litigation steps.
This distinction matters because injunctions are generally interim remedies. The court is being asked to protect a position, restrain conduct, or require action while the underlying rights of the parties remain to be determined.
Rule 40.01 expressly permits a motion for an interlocutory injunction or mandatory order in both pending and intended proceedings.
For the broader purpose of this remedy, see What is an injunction in Ontario?.
Why might an injunction be needed before the ordinary lawsuit progresses?
Some disputes cannot wait for the usual sequence of pleadings, documentary production, discovery, and trial.
For example, a party may allege that confidential information is about to be disclosed, property or assets are about to be transferred, contractual restrictions are being breached, or another event may occur before the dispute can be determined in the ordinary course.
In those circumstances, the Superior Court of Justice may be asked to intervene on an interim basis. Section 101 of the Courts of Justice Act gives the court authority to grant an interlocutory injunction or mandatory order where it appears just or convenient to do so.
Can the injunction be sought without notice at the same time?
Potentially, but that is a separate issue.
Where the circumstances justify proceeding without advance notice to the responding party, Rule 40.02 governs the duration and extension of a without-notice interlocutory injunction or mandatory order.
See Can you get an injunction without notice to the other side in Ontario? for those requirements.
The fact that a proceeding is only intended does not, by itself, mean that the motion should proceed without notice.
Do you still have to satisfy the injunction test?
Yes. Rule 40.01 addresses when and how the motion may be brought; it does not remove the substantive requirements for obtaining the injunction.
Depending on the relief requested, the applicant may still need to establish the applicable elements concerning the merits of the underlying claim, irreparable harm, and the balance of convenience.
For the conventional interlocutory-injunction framework, see What do you have to prove to get an interlocutory injunction in Ontario?
How does ME Law assess an injunction before a proceeding is fully underway?
ME Law assesses the underlying cause of action, urgency, available evidence, the conduct that needs to be restrained or compelled, and whether the proposed injunction can properly be connected to a pending or intended proceeding.
The analysis also includes what materials are required for the motion, whether notice should be given, and how the requested interim relief fits with the proceeding that will determine the parties’ substantive rights.
For ME Law’s approach to interim relief sought at the outset of litigation, see Urgent Interlocutory and Interim Injunctions.
Contact ME Law if you need advice about seeking urgent injunctive relief before or at the outset of an Ontario proceeding.