861808 Ontario Inc. v. Canada (Revenue Agency), 2013 ONCA 604:
 We do not accept this submission. Section 18(1) of the FCA explicitly grants the Federal Court "exclusive original jurisdiction to issue an injunction". There is nothing ambiguous in this language; it applies to all injunctions, including interim, interlocutory and permanent. Moreover, all of the relevant case authorities support the motion judge's analysis and conclusion: see Canada (Attorney General) v. TeleZone Inc., 2010 SCC 62, at para. 52; Puttkemery v. Air Canada,  O.J, No. 2686 (Div. Ct.), at paras. 5-6; and Burkes v. Canada (Revenue Agency), 2010 ONSC 3485, at paras. 9-15.
 In TeleZone, Binnie J. dealt with this issue explicitly, at para. 52:
All of the remedies listed in s. 18(1)(a) are traditional administrative law remedies, including the four prerogative writs – certiorari, prohibition,mandamus and quo warranto – and declaratory and injunctive relief in the administrative law context. Section 18 does not include an award of damages. If a claimant seeks compensation, he or she cannot get it on judicial review. By the same token, the plaintiff in a damages action is not entitled to add a supplementary claim for a declaration or injunction to prevent the government from acting on a decision said to be tainted by illegality. That is the domain of the Federal Court. [Emphasis added.]
 This passage is conclusive against the appellant's argument.