Inside the Keller Williams injunction: A franchise lawyer explains

After an Ontario Superior Court judge recently granted an interlocutory (temporary) injunction enforcing non-competition clauses in two Keller Williams franchise agreements, many agents and brokers have been trying to understand what the decision means in practice, and what happens next.

To help unpack the legal implications, Real Estate Magazine spoke with Jennifer Dolman, a veteran franchise lawyer and partner at Osler Hoskin & Harcourt, who brings decades of experience in franchise disputes and injunctions.

In short, the order requires compliance with the KW franchise agreement as written. However, as Dolman outlines, the picture is far from settled. 

Because the decision is interlocutory, meaning it is not a final ruling, the defendants have a chance to appeal, introducing uncertainty about the immediate, real-world impact of the order.

Beyond the headlines, Dolman provides valuable context on how interim non-competes work in franchising, why courts tend to view them differently from post-term restrictions, and why allegations of “fundamental breach” are difficult to establish. She also addresses common questions around verbal assurances, written agreements, and the risks franchisees face when attempting to exit a system mid-term.

This conversation offers clarity for industry professionals looking to better understand the legal framework behind this case and why it matters.