Cdn.benefitnews.com

bulletin
Class Actions
Is This The End Of Quebec
on this issue, Société canadienne des postes v. Lépine Exceptionalism In Class Action Matters? and Hocking v. Haziza and HSBC Bank Canada, both
rendered by the Court of Appeal, have received a chilly reception to national class actions, especially those certified outside the province. In both Lépine and On May 28, 2008, the Honourable Danielle Grenier Hocking, motions were brought in Quebec to recognize of the Superior Court of Quebec rendered a judgment and to declare enforceable class action settlements that authorizing the institution of a national class action had been rendered in another province, namely, Ontario. in the Province of Quebec. Whereas national class The Superior Court in both cases refused to declare the actions hardly raise an eyebrow in our neighbour to the class action settlements enforceable in Quebec, deci- south and, even in Canada, the provincial legislature sions that were upheld on appeal. Lépine and Hocking and the bench have warmed to the idea of national are currently on appeal before the Supreme Court of class actions, Quebec remained a holdout against class actions extending beyond its borders until the authoriza- tion judgment in Brito v. Pfizer Canada Inc.
The rock upon which previous class actions had foundered and which the present judgment seeks to lITIgATIOn
overcome concerns notice to the members residing The proceedings underlying Quebec’s first national outside the province and the jurisdiction before which class action are a civil liability suit brought against the purported class actions were brought.
Pfizer Canada Inc. and Pfizer Inc. on behalf of every In the instant case, the court did not immediately person residing in Canada having used Depo-Provera. resolve the issue of notification to the class members, Depo-Provera is a contraceptive taken by injection which preferring to defer arguments on that point to a is effective for a period of three months. Depo-Provera subsequent hearing. However, the court declared itself is allegedly harmful to the women who have taken it, satisfied that through a properly drafted order, class as users may suffer an irreversible loss of their bone members outside Quebec could be meaningfully notified density, which may cause osteoporosis.
nATIOnAl ClAss ACTIOns In QuébEC
The court’s approach to jurisdiction was twofold. On the In recent years, various provinces – including Alberta, one hand, it concluded that it had jurisdiction over Pfizer British Columbia, Saskatchewan and Newfoundland – Canada Inc. whose head office is in the Province of have legislated to allow the inclusion of class members Quebec. On the other hand, with respect to Pfizer Inc., residing outside their province. On the other hand, the an American company, the court concluded that Quebec Quebec National Assembly has been deafeningly silent was in as good a position as any other province to exert about allowing or prohibiting the inclusion of class jurisdiction, and furthermore, by ensuring actual notice to the members of the class, the members would be able to consent to the jurisdiction of the Quebec Court, The bench has been equally reticent to authorize nation- or otherwise exclude themselves from the class.
al class actions. The two judgments rendered previously Is This The End Of Quebec Exceptionalism In Class Action Matters?
Montréal Ottawa Toronto Calgary Vancouver New York Chicago London Beijing blakes.com
bulletin
Class Actions
An argument that was dealt with by the court was the for more information on this case, please contact: quasi-insurmountable gulf between the Quebec residents of the class, whose case is governed by Quebec law, and those residents of other Canadian provinces who, Or, you may contact any of the following members of pursuant to Quebec conflict of law provisions, could elect to apply either the law of the residence of the manufacturer or the law of their home province. The court declared this apparent difficulty could be resolved by the division of the class into subclasses by applicable law, whether Quebec law or the law of the province of ThE fuTurE Of nATIOnAl ClAss ACTIOns In
Quebec has long been considered a haven for the plain- tiff class action bar. With this recent judgment, there is no doubt that it will, for the time being, retain this status for future national class actions.
That being said, one wonders whether the court would have decided differently had it not been for Pfizer Canada Inc.’s head office located in Quebec which permitted the court to exert jurisdiction over one of the two defendants. One thing is sure, both plaintiff and defendant class action lawyers will be closely follow- ing Lépine and Hocking before the Supreme Court of to subscribe to other Blakes Bulletins. Blakes periodical y provides materials on our services and developments in the law to interested persons. If you do not wish to receive further bul etins or other materials from Blakes, please contact Blakes Marketing Department at 416.863.3036 or [email protected]. for additional information on our privacy practices, please contact us at [email protected]. Blakes Bul etin is intended for informational purposes only and does not create a lawyer-client relationship. The transmission of this information does not suggest Blakes or any of its lawyers are practising law of any jurisdiction other than Canada. The information provided in this bul etin is summary in nature and does not constitute legal advice. We would be pleased to provide additional details or advice about specific situations if desired. for permission to reprint articles, please contact Blakes Marketing Department at 416.863.2403 or [email protected] Blake, Cassels & Graydon LLP. Montréal Ottawa Toronto Calgary Vancouver New York Chicago London Beijing blakes.com

Source: http://cdn.benefitnews.com/media/pdfs/BenefitsNetwork/2008/06/19/134032332BlakesClass_Actions_June2008.pdf