Collective action permitted where representative does not have direct cause of action against each defendant

Supreme court | Civil Procedure

CLASS ACTIONS

Collective action permitted where representative does not have direct cause of action against each defendant

Consumers seeking repayment of conversion charges imposed by several credit card issuers (banks) on credit card purchases made in foreign currencies commenced class action claiming that conversion charges violated Consumer Protection Act (Que.). Banks defended, claiming that representative plaintiffs did not have standing to sue all banks since they did not have direct cause of action against each of them. Superior Court refused to dismiss class action on basis that plaintiffs did not have standing. Court of Appeal upheld conclusion that representative plaintiffs had sufficient interest against all banks to permit class action to proceed. Further appeal to Supreme Court of Canada by banks dismissed. Code of Civil Procedure (Que.), requires plaintiffs to have “sufficient interest” and “common interest” in action. When interpreted in context of collective and representative nature of class action, law permits collective action where representative does not have direct cause of action against, or legal relationship with, each defendant. Judge may authorize class action where representative plaintiff is adequate representative of class and actions against each defendant involve identical, similar or related questions of law or fact. Standing must be analyzed through lens of criteria for authorization of class actions and understood from perspective of common interest of proposed class, not solely from perspective of representative plaintiff. Conclusion consistent with most other Canadian jurisdictions, ensures economy of judicial resources, increases access to justice and averts possibility of conflicting judgments.
Marcotte c. Banque de Montreal (Sep. 19, 2014, S.C.C., McLachlin C.J.C., LeBel J., Abella J., Rothstein J., Cromwell J., Moldaver J., and Wagner J., File No. 35009) Decision at 223 A.C.W.S. (3d) 925 was reversed in part.  244 A.C.W.S. (3d) 74.

Free newsletter

Our newsletter is FREE and keeps you up to date on all the developments in the Ontario legal community. Please enter your email address below to subscribe.

Recent articles & video

Man loses almost entire inheritance in costs for 'reprehensible,' 'scorched earth' litigation

Ontario Court of Appeal allows Trial Lawyers Association to intervene in medical malpractice case

Ontario Court of Appeal denies extension to perfect appeal in a motor vehicle collision case

Court denies former bencher's request for civil trial data that would show extent of court delays

Ontario Court of Appeal allows wife to collect from husband's debtors through garnishment

Ontario government overhauling labour and employment laws, including for legal profession

Most Read Articles

Ontario government overhauling labour and employment laws, including for legal profession

Court denies former bencher's request for civil trial data that would show extent of court delays

Court reduces sentence because Crown admitted disputed facts in guilty plea while accused absconded

Ontario Superior Court of Justice approves class action settlement over LifeLabs data breach