Sentences with phrase «certified in this class proceeding»

A. Introduction and factual Background [2] The appellant appeals the judgment that the trial judge rendered on the common issues certified in this class proceeding.

Not exact matches

Since then, I have also proceeded to take classes in animal behavior and training, and am in the final stages of completing my CPDT - KA (certified professional dog trainer).

Ontario's Divisional Court conditionally certified the action as a class proceeding in April 2009, and the Ontario Court of Appeal dismissed an attempt by Quizno's to stay the proceedings in a June 2010 ruling.

[1] This action was commenced in 1997, certified as a class proceeding in 2001, and tried in 2011.

In 1250264 Ontario Inc. v. Pet Valu Canada Inc. («1250»), Justice Strathy of the Ontario Superior Court of Justice took the extraordinary step of invalidating the majority of opt - out notices obtained from potential class members in a certified class proceeding due to the irreparable damage caused to the process by the aggressive conduct of a third partIn 1250264 Ontario Inc. v. Pet Valu Canada Inc. («1250»), Justice Strathy of the Ontario Superior Court of Justice took the extraordinary step of invalidating the majority of opt - out notices obtained from potential class members in a certified class proceeding due to the irreparable damage caused to the process by the aggressive conduct of a third partin a certified class proceeding due to the irreparable damage caused to the process by the aggressive conduct of a third party.

In 1250264 Ontario Inc. v. Pet Valu Canada Inc. [1](«1250»), Justice Strathy of the Ontario Superior Court of Justice took the extraordinary step of invalidating the majority of opt - out notices obtained from potential class members in a certified class proceeding due to the irreparable damage caused to the process by the aggressive conduct of a third partIn 1250264 Ontario Inc. v. Pet Valu Canada Inc. [1](«1250»), Justice Strathy of the Ontario Superior Court of Justice took the extraordinary step of invalidating the majority of opt - out notices obtained from potential class members in a certified class proceeding due to the irreparable damage caused to the process by the aggressive conduct of a third partin a certified class proceeding due to the irreparable damage caused to the process by the aggressive conduct of a third party.

Class Members are automatically included in a class action once certified, unless they choose to opt - out of the proceeClass Members are automatically included in a class action once certified, unless they choose to opt - out of the proceeclass action once certified, unless they choose to opt - out of the proceeding.

This certified class proceeding is in the examination for discovery phase.

It was certified as a class proceeding [1] in February, 2010 and settled (for the first time) in August, 2014.

In certifying the action as a class proceeding, Belobaba J. addressed Manulife's argument that the pleadings did not disclose a cause of action claim in respect of the s. 138 claim because the action was not commenced within three years of the alleged misrepresentations (as required by s. 138.14 of the Act and the Ontario Court of Appeal's decision in Sharma v. Timminco Ltd., 2012 ONCA 107In certifying the action as a class proceeding, Belobaba J. addressed Manulife's argument that the pleadings did not disclose a cause of action claim in respect of the s. 138 claim because the action was not commenced within three years of the alleged misrepresentations (as required by s. 138.14 of the Act and the Ontario Court of Appeal's decision in Sharma v. Timminco Ltd., 2012 ONCA 107in respect of the s. 138 claim because the action was not commenced within three years of the alleged misrepresentations (as required by s. 138.14 of the Act and the Ontario Court of Appeal's decision in Sharma v. Timminco Ltd., 2012 ONCA 107in Sharma v. Timminco Ltd., 2012 ONCA 107).

In certifying the action as a class proceeding and granting leave to pursue a s. 138 claim, Belobaba J. focused on two aspects integral to asserting the statutory cause of action: the test for leave to pursue such a proceeding, and the requirement under the Class Proceedings Act, S.O. 1992, c. 6, that the pleadings disclose a cause of acclass proceeding and granting leave to pursue a s. 138 claim, Belobaba J. focused on two aspects integral to asserting the statutory cause of action: the test for leave to pursue such a proceeding, and the requirement under the Class Proceedings Act, S.O. 1992, c. 6, that the pleadings disclose a cause of acClass Proceedings Act, S.O. 1992, c. 6, that the pleadings disclose a cause of action.

In Gariepy, Justice Nordheimer declined to certify the action as a class proceeding on the basis that the determination of whether the defendant's products were defective did not significantly advance the overall determination of liability, as there were a myriad of reasons why a class member's plumbing system might fail.

In the meantime, two further secondary market liability cases had come before the Court of Appeal on appeal: Green v. Canadian Imperial Bank of Commerce (2012 ONSC 3637), in which Justice Strathy reluctantly declined to certify a class action because it was time - barred by the three - year limitation period; and Silver v. IMAX (2012 ONSC 4881), in which Justice van Rensburg granted an order issuing retroactive leave under s. 138.8 of the OSA to allow the claim to proceeIn the meantime, two further secondary market liability cases had come before the Court of Appeal on appeal: Green v. Canadian Imperial Bank of Commerce (2012 ONSC 3637), in which Justice Strathy reluctantly declined to certify a class action because it was time - barred by the three - year limitation period; and Silver v. IMAX (2012 ONSC 4881), in which Justice van Rensburg granted an order issuing retroactive leave under s. 138.8 of the OSA to allow the claim to proceein which Justice Strathy reluctantly declined to certify a class action because it was time - barred by the three - year limitation period; and Silver v. IMAX (2012 ONSC 4881), in which Justice van Rensburg granted an order issuing retroactive leave under s. 138.8 of the OSA to allow the claim to proceein which Justice van Rensburg granted an order issuing retroactive leave under s. 138.8 of the OSA to allow the claim to proceed.

This past Friday the Supreme Court of British Columbia released the May 6 decision in Koubi v. Mazda Canada Inc. [Mazda], certifying a class - action under the Class Proceeding Act (CPA) on behalf of representative who purchased 17,909 Mazda3 vehicles between 2004 and 2007 over an alleged door lock declass - action under the Class Proceeding Act (CPA) on behalf of representative who purchased 17,909 Mazda3 vehicles between 2004 and 2007 over an alleged door lock deClass Proceeding Act (CPA) on behalf of representative who purchased 17,909 Mazda3 vehicles between 2004 and 2007 over an alleged door lock defect.

Third, the court has the discretion to make any order it considers appropriate in a certification application for a multi-jurisdictional proceeding, including certifying only a portion of a proposed class.

Second, in certifying a multi-jurisdictional class proceeding, the court must determine whether it would be preferable for some or all of the claims or common issues to be resolved in existing proceedings elsewhere in Canada.

On March 26, 2014, the Ontario Superior Court of Justice (Divisional Court) issued reasons for judgment certifying the proceedings commenced in Ontario as a class proceeding.