Skip to main content
This website uses cookies. By continuing to use this website you are agreeing to our use of cookies as described in our privacy policy.
Client Work

Ubisoft Divertissements inc. c. Tremblay, D.T.E. 2006 T-493 (C.S.) D.T.E. 2006 T-653 (C.S.)

Reading Time 2 minute read Subscribe
Ubisoft Divertissements inc. c. Tremblay, D.T.E. 2006 T-493 (C.S.) D.T.E. 2006 T-653 (C.S.) In a ruling issued on May 17, 2006, by the Superior Court of Montreal, the Honourable Justice Hélène Langlois has issued a safeguard order valid until June 7, 2006. The ruling orders Martin Tremblay to respect the contractual obligations included in the employment contract he signed with Ubisoft. The text of the judgment stipulates that Martin Tremblay must: "(...) cease immediately working, directly or indirectly, within the territories of Canada, the United States and Mexico, for his own behalf or on behalf of any third party, in any business which manufactures or commercializes video products that may compete with products sold, manufactured or developed by applicant Ubisoft." The Honourable Justice also completely rejected Martin Tremblay's allegations regarding the fact that he was the object of a "constructive dismissal". In her judgement, she stated "(...) it doesn't appear from the proof that Martin Tremblay was the object of a constructive dismissal and consequently the non-compete clause produces all its effect. In this respect Ubisoft's right appears to be clear."  Martin Tremblay and Vivendi Games inc. didn't dispute the validity of the non-compete clause, only stating the clause couldn't be applied in this specific case. Ubisoft was represented by Nathalie-Anne Béliveau and Antoine Aylwin.

    Sign up for updates from this team

    Receive email updates from our team