A ruling has been issued by the Quebec Superior Court in a 2007 lawsuit filed by Montreal-based Zoom Media against Rouge Media, also of Montreal. 

Zoom Media filed the lawsuit against Rouge requesting the removal of billboards, screens or advertising media from 49 establishments in which it claimed it had exclusive vendor agreements. Zoom also sought to prohibit Rouge from compelling its clients to breach their contractual obligations and to prevent Rouge Media from interfering in the existing contractual relationships of Zoom Media.

In a verdict in which both sides claimed victory, the Court ordered Rouge Media to remove its advertising products from the 49 venues listed in the suit, but noted that it would not prohibit Rouge Media from the normal discourse of business by preventing it from contacting business that hold contracts with Zoom. It also said that sufficient proof was not provided that Rouge Media was “inciting” any business to break its contracts with Zoom.

Rosanne Caron, president, Out-of-Home Marketing Association of Canada, tells MiC the national organization supports the ruling, and that media operators should respect each other’s contracts.

“The judgement from the Superior Court of Quebec is a validation of that tenet. While competition is healthy for the market, disregard of media exclusivities hinders all stakeholders including media operators, clients and agencies.”

This is the second such case before the Quebec Superior Court of late. Newad Media filed a similar suit against Rouge in 2007, claiming Rouge had violated exclusivity agreements with venues within its network. However, the Superior Court dismissed the suit in a Jan. 6, 2011 decision, a decision Newad promised to appeal.

In a press statement April 13, Rouge Media president Martin Poitras said the company would appeal the decision and seek more clarity on the definition of venue exclusivity for media vendors.