2 total
Appeal allowed; questions regarding pension plan administrative costs directed to trial rather than decided under Rule 21.
The defendants appealed a motions judge's answers to questions posed under Rule 21.01(1)(a) regarding a pension plan surplus following the sale of a business division.
The appeal concerned only the answers relating to administrative costs and expenses.
The Court of Appeal allowed the appeal, finding that the questions were inextricably linked to other issues that the motions judge had correctly directed to trial, such as the effect of statements in pension booklets and reliance on them.
The Court set aside the answers and directed that the issues regarding administrative costs and expenses also proceed to trial.
Leave to appeal class certification granted to determine if representative plaintiffs had conflicts with other franchisees.
The defendant franchisor moved for leave to appeal an order certifying a class proceeding brought by franchisees regarding the withholding of rebates.
The defendant argued that the proposed representative plaintiffs had a conflict of interest with other class members who had different economic arrangements with the franchisor and feared disruption of their businesses.
The court granted leave to appeal, finding that the issue of whether the representative plaintiffs could fairly and adequately represent the class without conflict was open to serious debate and of general importance to the development of class action law.
