Canadian Class Actions Law -

Vanessa Voakes -

On Thursday, March 21, 2013, the Supreme Court of Canada dismissed the applications for leave to appeal two decisions of the Court of Appeal for Ontario with costs: Fulawka v. Bank of Nova Scotia and Fresco v. Canadian Imperial Bank of Commerce. Both cases are “off the clock” overtime class actions brought on behalf of certain bank employees in which it is alleged that their employers’ policies and practices for compensation of overtime work wrongfully denied them overtime pay under the Canada Labour Code, breached their employment contracts, and breached a duty of good faith owed to them by their employer. 

Continue Reading

Vanessa Voakes –

On February 14, 2013, the Federal Court of Appeal in Murphy v. Amway Canada Corp. affirmed the decision of the court below, staying a proposed class proceeding in light of a contractual arbitration clause and class action waiver.  The decision re-affirms the principle espoused by the Supreme Court of Canada in Seidel v. TELUS Communications Inc. (“Seidel”) that, absent statutory language restricting or prohibiting either arbitration clauses or class action waivers, the courts should give effect to them.^[1]

Continue Reading

Michael Mestinsek -

As predicted, in the wake of Alberta’s Class Proceedings Act, proclaimed in force on April 1, 2004, the number and magnitude of class actions in Alberta have continued to surge. Recent amendments passed in 2010 to the certification regime, including in relation to multi-jurisdictional certifications and rendering Alberta an “opt-out” jurisdiction, have continued the trend towards easing the burden on class action plaintiffs in commencing and certifying class actions in Alberta.

This is exemplified by the recent filing of a class action by the Calgary-based JSS Barristers LLP firm on behalf of students whose personal information was allegedly misplaced by the Government of Canada student loans program through the loss of a computer hard drive containing this information. The commencement of this action was quickly reported by major news agencies in Alberta and will, no doubt, garner national attention. We expect that other law firms across the country will be launching similar actions.

Continue Reading

Mari Maimets -

The plaintiff employees in the high-profile eHealth Ontario (“eHealth”) class action Perrenoud v. eHealth Ontario have cleared the certification hurdle for three of four claims brought against eHealth and Her Majesty the Queen in Right of Ontario (“Ontario”) as a result of eHealth’s decision last year to suspend its Performance Incentive Policy and cancel the employees’ performance awards and merit increases for fiscal years 2010/11 and 2011/12. In a decision released on November 26, 2012, Justice Perell of the Ontario Superior Court of Justice certified the plaintiffs’ claims against eHealth for breach of contract, but refused to certify the claim against Ontario for the tort of inducing breach of contract.

Continue Reading

Vanessa Voakes and Tim Crljenica -

While the route of appeal for decisions on carriage motions has been examined in other jurisdictions in Canada, the recently released reasons in Locking v. Armtec Infrastructure Inc. mark the first time that the Court of Appeal for Ontario has weighed in on the issue.  Noting the absence of specific guidance on the matter in the Class Proceedings Act, 1992 (the CPA), the Court turned to the Courts of Justice Act (the CJA) and found that a motion judge’s order on a carriage motion is interlocutory and appeal lies to the Divisional Court, with leave. 

Continue Reading