Lexpert US Guides

Litigation 2014

The Lexpert Guides to the Leading US/Canada Cross-Border Corporate and Litigation Lawyers in Canada profiles leading business lawyers and features articles for attorneys and in-house counsel in the US about business law issues in Canada.

Issue link: https://digital.carswellmedia.com/i/423776

Contents of this Issue

Navigation

Page 33 of 135

34 | LEXPERT • December 2014 | www.lexpert.ca ANTITRUST CLASS ACTIONS IN OUR CONTRIBUTION to last year's edition of this publication we advised on the growing phenomenon of international law-based tort claims by foreign plaintiffs directed at Canadian companies, primarily those engaged in extractive industries operat- ing abroad (see: "International Human Rights-Based Torts: A New Species of Litigation Risk for Canadian Companies Operating Abroad," 2013 Lexpert® Guide to the Leading US/Canada Cross-border Litigation Lawyers in Canada). Canadian judicial receptivity to "global" litigation has also been given a substantial boost in the antitrust field, the topic we specifically address here. This receptivity, which appears to be replicating itself in Canadian courts more broadly, parallels substantial retrenchment by the US Supreme Court in comparable cases, notably in the context of alleged violations of securities law. See and compare: Hannah L. Buxbaum; "Remedies for Foreign Investors under U.S. Federal Securities Law," 75 Law of Contemp. Prob. 161 (2012); Tanya Monestier, "Is Canada the New Shangri-La of Global Securities Class Actions?" 32 Nw. J. Int'l L. & Bus. 305 (2012); Abdula v. Canadian Solar Inc. et al., 2012 ONCA 211 and Silver v. Imax Corporation (2009), 86 C.P.C. (6th) 273 (Ont. S.C.J.), aff 'd 2014 ONCA 90, leave to appeal to SCC granted, 35811 (7 August 2014); Morrison v. National Australia Bank Ltd., 130 S. Ct. 2869 (U.S. Sup. Ct., 2010). Last fall, the Supreme Court of Canada released a trilogy of class-action certifica- tion decisions: Pro-Sys Consultants Ltd. v. Microsoft Corporation, 2013 SCC 57 ("Pro- Sys"); Sun-Rype Products Ltd. v. Archer Daniels Midland Company, 2013 SCC 58 ("Sun-Rype"); and Infineon Technologies AG v. Option consommateurs, 2013 SCC 59 ("Infineon") ("the Pro-Sys Trilogy") that has opened the door for Canadian consumers of imported goods into Canada or product components manufactured abroad to bring class actions as indirect purchasers for damages based on violations of Canada's com- ANOTHER SEA CHANGE FOR GLOBAL LITIGATION IN CANADIAN COURTS: INDIRECT PURCHASERS RECEIVE GREEN LIGHT FOR ANTITRUST CLASS ACTIONS FROM THE SUPREME COURT OF CANADA Class-action certifi cation decisions have opened the door for Canadian consumers of imported goods into Canada or product components manufactured abroad to bring class actions based on Canada's competition laws BY H. SCOTT FAIRLEY, NIKIFOROS IATROU AND BRONWYN ROE, WEIRFOULDS LLP

Articles in this issue

Archives of this issue

view archives of Lexpert US Guides - Litigation 2014