In an effort to obtain support for their cause, members of the Shipworkers' Trade Union picketed the unloading of a non-Canadian ship. The picketing blocked the unloading of the non-Canadian ship, and in the violence that followed, several of the crew of the non-Canadian ship were injured when assaulted by the pickets. The union members were dissatisfied with the Canadian government's policy of allowing non-Canadian ships to take part in the Canadian coastal trade. The union hoped to force the government to implement the recommendations of a report which had been completed earlier and which favoured the limitation of trade to Canadian ships.
a. What rights, if any, do the parties have in this case?
b. If legal action were taken, what would be the outcome?

a. The owner of the picketed ship has the right to seek an injunction to prohibit the picketing as secondary picketing. The union members were not employees of this particular ship owner nor were they performing any services of any kind. Furthermore, the picketed ship was not a customer of the picketers' employer and could not carry any direct influence in the outcome of the picketers' cause. The picketing activity, however, created financial risks for the ship through delay.
The union members have a right to convey their message to the government, however, through established and lawful channels. The picketing of another party lawfully carrying out its business and uninvolved in the political decision process in this case amounts to harassment.
b. Even though there was no existing labour dispute between these union members and their employer, the court in this case decided that this amounted to prohibited secondary picketing. Accordingly, the injunction was granted. The dispute which provoked the picketing was between the union and the government. While secondary picketing to peacefully convey information is not illegal, the interference with the operation of the ship and the violence that took place would be an illegal activity.