The appellant franchisees appealed the dismissal of their motion to certify a class proceeding against the respondent franchisor and distributors.
The appellants alleged price maintenance under the Competition Act, civil conspiracy, and breach of contract regarding mark-ups and sourcing fees for supplies.
The Divisional Court allowed the appeal, finding the motion judge erred in principle by focusing exclusively on the individualized nature of damages and failing to recognize that the breach of the Competition Act, breach of contract, and the fact of loss were common issues.
The Court conditionally certified the class action, concluding it was the preferable procedure to achieve judicial economy, access to justice, and behaviour modification.
