John N. Laxton

The respondents, members of a pension plan, sought to terminate the pension trust and distribute its $11 million surplus among themselves using the common law rule in Saunders v. Vautier.

The employer, Rogers Communications Inc., had previously closed the plan, taken contribution holidays, and merged it with other plans.

The Supreme Court of Canada held that the rule in Saunders v. Vautier does not apply to employment pension trusts, which are heavily regulated by the Pension Benefits Standards Act, 1985 (PBSA).

The Court found that the PBSA provides a comprehensive scheme for plan termination and that the members must seek recourse through the Superintendent of Financial Institutions rather than relying on the common law rule to bypass the statutory framework.

The parents of a child born with Down syndrome sued the mother's doctor for failing to advise her of testing that would have revealed the condition.

The trial judge awarded damages for the child's care up to age 19, plus an $80,000 contingency for adult care, finding that the state would cover adult group home costs.

The Court of Appeal increased the award, holding that post-trial amendments to the Family Relations Act made the parents legally responsible for adult care.

The Supreme Court of Canada allowed the doctor's appeal and restored the trial judgment, concluding that the child would withdraw from the parents' charge upon entering a group home, meaning the statutory support obligation would not apply and the state would bear the costs.