Justice Latimer granted an interlocutory injunction preventing EXP Services from operating a Marshall Hammer in a Burnaby commercial building pending trial or further order. The order was prohibitory and the landlord needed to show a serious question, not a strong prima facie case. Evidence included vibration complaints, the lease’s nuisance and no-waiver clauses, and the landlord’s potential loss of reputation and future tenants. The tenant’s economic disruption was compensable in damages. The injunction requires an undertaking as to damages from the landlord. The underlying lease dispute remains for trial.
Case Commentary
391102 B.C. Ltd. v EXP Services Inc., 2026 BCSC 1993
The BC Supreme Court restrained a commercial tenant from operating an asphalt testing machine pending trial. The landlord showed a serious issue under the lease, irreparable reputational harm and a favourable balance of convenience.
Source reviewed · Court holding
Held. The BC Supreme Court restrained a commercial tenant from operating an asphalt testing machine pending trial.
Binder · The business behind your business
Reading about it is one thing. Managing your own business issue is another.
A legal development is useful context. Your contracts, responsibilities, correspondence and actual decisions determine what needs attention in your business. Binder organizes what you know and helps you recognize what still needs attention.
Across Binder Intelligence
One issue, different perspectives.
The same development can matter to managers, insurers, boards and institutions. Explore the related material each publication has independently verified.
The article is a starting point, not a legal strategy.
Binder brings the documents, correspondence and decisions surrounding a business issue into one Matter. When individual professional guidance is required, use an appropriately qualified lawyer.
See how Binder works →Source and further context BC Supreme Court original complete reasons, Latimer J., paragraphs 1 to 54 ↗
Intelligence Law publishes commentary and information, not individualized legal advice. Legal rules and court procedure vary by jurisdiction and circumstances.