Lexpert Special Editions

38 | Big Suits shareholders purported to advance a parallel class action on to continue to litigate the Ontario action as members of a smaller class. behalf of NASDAQ shareholders in US Federal Court. As parallel class actions against cross-border public issuers In 2012, a US Judge approved a settlement of the US class action, but made that order conditional upon the decision of become more common, so too does the prospect of a global class Justice van Rensburg to enforce it; if so, the shareholders bound in a Canadian action overlapping with a class in a US parallel by the US order (i.e. , those shareholders who did not opt out of class action. This decision gives public issuer defendants the ability to the US class and were therefore eligible to receive compensation), settle a US class action, and thereby narrow the class in a parallel could not also continue to participate in the Ontario action. IMAX brought a motion to amend the Class definition in the Canadian action, rather than be forced to agree to terms required Ontario action to exclude the NASDAQ purchasers. Justice van by counsel on both sides of the border simultaneously. Further to the above, the decision provides a template for the Rensburg found for IMAX. The Court applied a two-step test. The Court first applied recognition and enforcement, by a Canadian judge, of an order the test for the recognition of a foreign judgment defined by the in a US class action which encompasses persons who are also Ontario Court of Appeal in Currie v. Mc-Donald's Restaurants members of a Canadian class. Paul Steep and Dana Peebles of McCarthy Tétrault LLP of Canada; that is, Justice van Rensburg concluded that there was a "real and substantial connection" between US Court and were counsel to IMAX in the Ontario Action. Class Counsel was Siskinds LLP's Dimitri Lascaris, Michael the NASDAQ purchasers of IMAX shares, that the investors in the US Action had been accorded procedural fairness and were Robb, Daniel Bach and Serge Kalloghlian; and Sutts Strosberg adequately represented, and that they had been given adequate LLP's William Sasso and Jay Strosberg. notice that their decision not to opt out of the US action settlement would preclude their continued participation in the Ontario action. (That notice to the cross-class members as to their Baert, Kirk M., Koskie Minsky LLP litigation options had been reviewed in advance Bailey, QC, Ken, Parlee McLaws LLP Barsalou, Pierre, Barsalou Lawson Rheault Barristers & Solicitors and amended by counsel to the Ontario plaintiffs.) Brock, QC, Brian J.E., Dutton Brock LLP Justice van Rensburg then considered the Casavant, Jean-Pierre, Casavant Mercier Casey, J. Brian, Bay Street Chambers Ontario Class Proceedings Act, 1992, and concluded Chaiton, Harvey G., Chaitons LLP that it would not be "preferable" for the NASDAQ Drymer, Stephen L., Woods LLP purchasers who were members of both classes to Fortier, QC, CC, OQ, L. Yves, Cabinet Yves Fortier Ghikas, QC, Gerald W.J., Gerald W. Ghikas Law Corporation lose the benefit of the US action settlement, and Green, Michel J., Robinson Sheppard Shapiro L.L.P. instead be required to continue as members of the Greenberg, QC, CArb, Benjamin J., Greenberg Arbitration & Mediation Services "GAMS" class in the Ontario action. Haigh, QC, David R., Burnet, Duckworth & Palmer LLP Halfnight, Jamieson, Halfnight & McKinlay Professional Corporation Justice van Rensburg rejected the argument that Heintzman, QC, OC, Thomas G., Thomas G. Heintzman Professional Corporation it would be unfair to the remaining TSX purchasers Henry, Patrick, Robinson Sheppard Shapiro L.L.P. Other Lexpert-ranked Lawyers LEXPERT®Ranked Lawyers Zalmanowitz, QC, Barry Dentons Canada LLP (780) 423-7344 barry.zalmanowitz@ dentons.com Mr. Zalmanowitz's competition and antitrust practice includes representing clients in criminal and non-criminal investigations and cases under the Competition Act, and advocacy in appellate courts. Zarnett, Benjamin Goodmans LLP (416) 597-4204 bzarnett@goodmans.ca Mr. Zarnett's litigation practice has included high-profile business cases including litigation over the proposed privatization of BCE, the AssetBacked Commercial Paper litigation, the Danier Leather class action and the Indalex priority dispute. Hitchman, Carol V.E., Gardiner Roberts LLP Horton, CArb, FCIArb, William G., William G. Horton Professional Corporation Hunter, QC, John J.L., Hunter Litigation Chambers Innes, William I., Rueter Scargall Bennett LLP Judge, John A.M., Arbitration Place Kenny, QC, William J., Miller Thomson LLP Knutsen, QC, Kristopher H., Carrel + Partners LLP Kugler, Gordon, Kugler Kandestin, L.L.P. Kuski, QC, Gordon J., McDougall Gauley LLP Lalonde, PC, OC, QC, AdE, Marc, Marc Lalonde - Barrister & Solicitor Langlois, QC, Raynold, Langlois Kronström Desjardins, LLP Lascaris, Dimitri, Siskinds LLP Lauzon, Yves, Lauzon Bélanger Lespérance Inc. Lespérance, André, Lauzon Bélanger Lespérance Inc. Mack, QC, Perry R., Mack Meagher LLP Marshall, QC, John J., John J. Marshall, Q.C. Professional Corporation Mathew, Douglas H., Thorsteinssons LLP McDonald, QC, Daniel J., Burnet, Duckworth & Palmer LLP McEwan, QC, J. Kenneth, Hunter Litigation Chambers Mitchell, Douglas C., Irving Mitchell Kalichman s.e.n.c.r.l./L.L.P. Mitchell, QC, Warren J.A., Thorsteinssons LLP Nathanson, QC, David C., Davis LLP Nathanson, QC, Irwin G., Nathanson, Schachter & Thompson LLP Nuss, QC, AdE, Joseph R., Woods LLP Oatley, Roger G., Oatley, Vigmond Personal Injury Lawyers LLP Peacock, QC, J. Patrick, Peacock Linder & Halt LLP Peerless, Michael J., Siskinds LLP Percival, QC, Barry A., Benson Percival Brown LLP Ritchie, QC, Scott, Siskinds LLP Robinson, QC, Larry B., Davis LLP Rogers, QC, Donald H., Rogers Partners LLP Russell, QC, Charles P., McLennan Ross LLP Samworth, Philippa G., Dutton Brock LLP Stieber, Steven, Stieber Berlach LLP Strosberg, QC, Harvey T., Sutts, Strosberg LLP Tushinski, Paul, Dutton Brock LLP Weder, Max, Davis LLP Wright, Charles M., Siskinds LLP

• Cover