A law firm sought to replace existing carriage counsel in a proposed pharmaceutical class action on the basis of unreasonable delay in bringing a certification motion.
The court held that under s. 12 of the Class Proceedings Act, 1992 it has supervisory jurisdiction to entertain a carriage transfer motion.
The court established a four-part test requiring proof that the delay is clearly unreasonable, that it causes actual prejudice to class members, that the explanation for the delay is inadequate, and that compelling certification within a fixed timeline would be unworkable or not in the class’s best interests.
Applying this test, the moving party failed to demonstrate unreasonable delay or prejudice, and the explanation for the delay was credible.
The motion to replace carriage counsel was therefore dismissed.
