[1] MURRAY J.:– The application was initially brought to stay or set aside the Statement of Claim and the ex parte Order granted by Madam Justice Nash on March 18, 1994 which restrains and enjoins the Defendants from disposing of or removing certain of their assets from the Province of Alberta, directs ex-customers of the Defendants to pay monies into Court and restrains and enjoins another customer from disposing of the purchase monies arising from certain sales. The Defendants say that the Alberta Courts have no jurisdiction and if they do, the dispute should be remitted to the State of Georgia for arbitration.

[2] Heinrich Fiedler manufactures and sells equipment to forest industries on a worldwide basis. By an agreement, signed in Germany on March 9th, to be effective the 13th day of April 1992, the Plaintiff assumed the duties of regional sales manager for Heinrich Fiedler Perforier-technik GmbH ("Heinrich Fiedler") for British Columbia, Saskatchewan, Alberta, Washington, Oregon and California (hereinafter referred to as the "contract"). His salary was set at $66,000, he was entitled to certain collateral benefits, the use of a car and an expense account.

[3] The contract anticipated that Heinrich Fiedler would form a wholly owned subsidiary company in the United States, likely in the State of Georgia, which explains the arbitration provision location and the governing law. Heinrich Fiedler was permitted to assign its interest in the agreement to that company. Paragraph 5 of the agreement contains a two-year restrictive covenant in the event of termination which territorially is extremely broad. The termination provisions provided: