A secondary market class proceeding against Timminco Ltd. has been in legal purgatory since 2012, a victim of the changing jurisprudence governing the limitation period applicable to those claims. In a May 2017 decision (Timminco 2017), the Ontario Court of Appeal decided that the case could not proceed because the plaintiff investor had not commenced his motion for leave to proceed under Ontario’s Securities Act in time.
Timminco 2017 represents the last gasp of the group of proposed class actions in which the courts of Ontario – and ultimately, the Supreme Court of Canada – worked out the governing interpretation of the interplay between Ontario’s Class Proceedings Act, 1992 and Securities Act.… Continue Reading
The following post on the Canadian Securities Regulatory Monitor blog may be of interest to readers of this blog: Deemed Reliance in the U.S. Supreme Court.
On June 23, 2014 the United States Supreme Court issued its much-anticipated decision in Halliburton Co. v. Erica P. John Fund (“Halliburton”), as issuers and investors in the U.S. (and Canada) wanted to see if the landscape for securities class actions in both countries would be fundamentally changed. The U.S. Supreme Court made only an uneventful change in U.S. law and so our Courts are not likely to see a sudden shift of class actions against cross-listed companies to Canada.… Continue Reading
Outside of Canada, there were several appeal decisions from the U.S. Supreme Court in 2013 that may well prove to have an impact here in Canada.
In regards to class action waiver clauses, a six justice majority of the U.S. Supreme Court held, in American Express Co. v. Italian Colors Restaurant, that the Court could not invalidate an express class action waiver in an arbitration agreement and so the claims should be continued by arbitration (although, the three remaining justices handed down a very strong dissent). This is an issue that has had little comment so far in Canada and has yet to be considered by our own Supreme Court. … Continue Reading