Lexpert magazine features articles and columns on developments in legal practice management, deals and lawsuits of interest in Canada, the law and business issues of interest to legal professionals and businesses that purchase legal services.
Issue link: https://digital.carswellmedia.com/i/1161185
LEXPERT MAGAZINE | AUGUST 2019 9 KARRAS V. SOCIÉTÉ DES LOTERIES DU QUÉBEC DECISION DATE: MAY 9, 2019 In Karras v. Société des loteries du Québec, the Court of Appeal of Québec dismissed an application for authorization to insti- tute a class action against Loto-Québec. In its decision, the appellate court reviewed the principles governing authorization of a class action and confirmed that the au- thorization judge, in exercising his role as a filter, must dismiss any action that has no reasonable chance of success in light of the evidence tendered. Background e plaintiff had been buying lottery tickets for over 20 years when she sought author- ization to institute an action in damages against Loto-Québec on the grounds that it failed to disclose to lottery ticket buyers the actual odds of winning a jackpot. e plaintiff also alleged that Lo- to-Québec was making false representa- tions since its advertising suggested the existence of a life of luxury while failing to disclose the actual odds of winning the lottery. e plaintiff claimed that Lo- to-Québec violated various provisions of the Civil Code of Québec (CCQ ) and the Consumer Protection Act (CPA), which provide that merchants have a duty to in- form consumers about important facts likely to influence their decision whether or not to purchase a product. As a result, the plaintiff sought dam- ages equal to the profits Loto-Québec generated on lottery ticket sales over the past three years, as well as $150 million in punitive damages. Court of Appeal's decision In a unanimous decision, the Court of Appeal upheld the trial judgment and dis- The Court of Appeal of Québec dismisses an application for authorization to institute a class action against Loto-Québec for misrepresentation, finding that Loto-Québec's advertising contains no false or misleading representations. The plaintiff had sought damages equal to the profits Loto-Québec generated on lottery ticket sales over three years, as well as $150 million in punitive damages. RECENT LITIGATION OF IMPORTANCE BIG SUITS LITIGATION SNAPSHOT missed the action in its entirety. e Court pointed out that the evidence filed by Lo- to-Québec clearly showed that it provides lottery ticket buyers, on its website for example, with all relevant information re- garding the odds of winning for each type of product available. e Court added that the information on the odds of winning can be lengthy and that it would be un- reasonable to reproduce the information on the back of every ticket. e Court also found that the information on the back of the lottery tickets was in all respects com- pliant with the applicable regulations. e Court found that Loto-Québec's advertising contained no false or mis- leading representations. According to the Court, the mere fact that their ads convey an appearance of happiness does not violate the provisions of the law prohibiting false or misleading representations. According to the Court, Loto-Québec is not required to reproduce on each of its ads the statistics on the odds of winning. e Court also issued certain comments regarding the plaintiff 's role and her ability to represent the interests of all class mem- bers. e Court mentioned that, during her examination on discovery, the plaintiff acknowledged that she believed her chan- ces of winning were around one in five million (in reality, her chances were one in fourteen million). According to the Court, the important fact for the consumer is the low likelihood of winning rather than the specific mathematical statistics. e Court added that the plaintiff had no individual claim since consumers are required to inform themselves and that she failed to do so even though the rel- evant information was fully available. e Court added that the representative had not shown any interest in the issues raised in this matter until the attorney ad litem suggested she act as a representative. Lastly, the Court found that the alleged causal connection was, at the very least, problematic in this case and that the very existence of the proposed class seemed vague. In light of such circumstances, the Court of Appeal dismissed the motion for authorization to institute a class action. Importance of the decision e Court of Appeal's decision confirms that it is possible to have a class action dismissed at the authorization stage when the defendant files evidence in the Court record (with its authorization) to establish that the key allegations of the motion are false and are nothing more than mere as- sumptions, opinions or inferences of facts that the Court should not assume to be true at the authorization stage. Loto-Québec was represented before the Court of Appeal by Mtre Olivier Kott Ad. E. and Mtre Dominic Dupoy of Norton Rose Fulbright Canada LLP. Loto-Québec's in-house lawyers were Dominic Gourgues, Director, Legal Affairs and Regulatory Compliance, and Erika De Almeida. Karim Renno and Benjamin Dionne of Renno & Vathilakis represented the appellant.