Articles 2019


Counsel Misconduct a Factor to Consider in Carriage Motions

  • October 31, 2018
  • Ashley Paterson and John Rawlins, Bennett Jones LLP

In Strohmaier v British Columbia (Attorney General), the British Columbia Supreme Court clarified that a history of misconduct on the part of counsel will be relevant to the analysis of the quality and experience of class counsel, in deciding between competing firms on a carriage motion.

Class Actions, Student Forum

Time Waits for No Class: The perils of delay in class proceedings

  • June 08, 2018
  • Elizabeth Richards and Mary Roberts

Even in class actions, there comes a time when enough is enough and the civil justice system will no longer tolerate an inordinate and inexplicable delay. In Smith v Armstrong et al, 2018 ONSC 2435, R.S.J. Gordon granted the federal defendants’ motion to dismiss a proposed class action for delay and found the plaintiff’s delay to be inordinate where the litigation had not advanced to the certification stage after 17 years.

Class Actions, Student Forum

Court Refuses to Approve Class Action Settlement Despite Approval in Other Provinces

  • May 28, 2018
  • Amanda M. Quayle, McDougall Gauley LLP

Multi-jurisdictional class actions in Canada continue to create problems for parties and the courts. Recently, the problems associated with multi-jurisdictional class actions resulted in the scuttling of a national class action settlement involving the prescription drugs OxyContin and OxyNeo. Despite three other courts approving the settlement in their respective jurisdictions, the Saskatchewan court in Perdikaris v Purdue Pharma Inc., refused to approve the same settlement.

Class Actions, Student Forum

Striking Equilibrium in Secondary Market Class Actions

  • May 09, 2018
  • Brandon Kain and Sabrina Bruno, McCarthy Tetrault

In Amaya, the Quebec Court of Appeal reinforced the legislative purpose of the leave requirement in secondary market class actions, as being the protection of public issuers and their long-term shareholders, and not the plaintiff-shareholders., holding that "the purpose of the screening mechanism [is] to deter opportunistic or abusive litigation by plaintiff-shareholders who inappropriately wish to take advantage of the favourable conditions for secondary market actions against issuers."

Class Actions, Student Forum

The Costs of Costs Uncertainty in Class Proceedings

  • April 05, 2018
  • Paul-Erik Veel, Lenczner Slaght

“Like a forest fire in this era of climate change, costs in class proceedings have gotten out of control.” These were the opening words of Justice Perell in his recent costs decision following a successful defence motion to stay the class proceedings in Heller v Uber Technologies Inc, 2018 ONSC 1690.

Civil Litigation, Class Actions

Justice Perell Stays Proposed Class Proceeding against Uber, in Favour of Arbitration in the Netherlands - Heller v Uber Technologies Inc.

  • March 26, 2018

Under the Employment Standards Act, there is no general prohibition against the arbitration of disputes arising under employment contracts. This has given rise to the question of whether proposed class actions under the ESA should be stayed in favour of arbitration where the agreement allegedly creating the employment relationship contains a clause requiring arbitration of disputes. This was precisely the issue that arose in the recent case of Heller v Uber Technologies, 2018 ONSC 718

Class Actions