The defendants sought leave to appeal a decision certifying a class action regarding allegedly defective Silzone-coated mechanical heart valves.
The defendants also sought leave to appeal an evidentiary ruling regarding expert affidavits filed in support of certification.
The Divisional Court dismissed the applications for leave to appeal, finding no conflicting decisions and no good reason to doubt the correctness of the certification order.
The court held that the common issues, including the defendants' standard of care and the risks associated with the product, were appropriate for a class proceeding.
