Nexus Solutions Inc. v. Krougly, 2026 ONCA 199
2026-03-19
Read full decision. Summary prepared by Alan Macek:
At issue in this appeal is the scope of s. 13(3) of the Copyright Act, which provides that an employer is the first owner of the copyright in a work created by an employee “in the course of” their employment. ... This would likely be the case where the work was made under the employer’s instructions and using its resources. Conversely, where the employee made the work on their own time, using their own equipment, and not as part of their assigned duties or responsibilities, the making of the work would likely fall outside of the course of their employment, and copyright would vest in the employee. ... Whether or not the task falls within the employee’s course of employment depends on whether the employer has actually assigned responsibility to the employee to carry out the task or perform the function in question. What is necessary, however, is that the employee’s actual (as opposed to potential) responsibilities included making the work. ... The trial judge found as a fact that Krougly’s responsibilities were limited to the development of CEMView and that the creation of a different CEMS, like Limedas, was therefore outside the scope of his employment responsibilities.