Spotwave Wireless Inc. v. Bonfeldt

Spotwave Wireless Inc. v. Bonfeldt

The court held that the evidence established the appellant had assigned any rights in the technology to Spotwave and that the employment contract barred the appellant from claiming ownership on termination (limiting him to damages), therefore there was no genuine issue for trial and summary judgment dismissing the counterclaims was correctly granted.

Citation
C43286
Parties
Plaintiff/appellant: Spotwave Wireless Inc.; Defendant/respondent: David Bongfeldt, personally and as Trustee of the Bongfeldt Family Trust
Court
Court of Appeal for Ontario
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
12 September 2005
Procedural Posture
Civil / Appeal From Summary Judgment
Outcome
Appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Summary Judgment, Assignment of Intellectual Property, Employment Contract Terms, Ownership of Technology, Consideration
Source Language
English
Civil Litigation Employment Law Intellectual Property Contract Law Summary Judgment Assignment of Intellectual Property Employment Contract Terms Ownership of Technology +1 more

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Legal principles 3 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Spotwave Wireless Inc.

Plaintiff/appellant

David Bongfeldt, personally and as Trustee of the Bongfeldt Family Trust

Defendant/respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil / Appeal From Summary Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the appellant had assigned any rights in the technology to Spotwave Wireless Inc.
  2. 2 Whether the employment contract precluded the appellant from claiming ownership of the technology upon termination and limited his remedy to damages
  3. 3 Whether there was a genuine issue for trial such that summary judgment was inappropriate

Ratio Decidendi

The court held that the evidence established the appellant had assigned any rights in the technology to Spotwave and that the employment contract barred the appellant from claiming ownership on termination (limiting him to damages), therefore there was no genuine issue for trial and summary judgment dismissing the counterclaims was correctly granted.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed

Orders

  • Appeal dismissed
  • Costs to respondents on a partial indemnity basis in the amount of $15,000 all inclusive