Court File and Parties
CITATION: Turon v. Abbott Laboratories Ltd., 2011 ONSC 4676
DIVISIONAL COURT FILE NO.: 343/11
DATE: 20110803
ONTARIO
SUPERIOR COURT OF JUSTICE
DIVISIONAL COURT
BETWEEN:
SARAH TURON and DIANE WILLIAMS Plaintiffs (Moving Parties)
– and –
ABBOTT LABORATORIES, LTD. and ABBOTT LABORATORIES Defendants (Respondents)
Aroosha Sadaghianloo, for the Plaintiffs (Moving Parties)
Caroline Zayid and Sarah Shody, for the Defendants (Respondents)
HEARD at Toronto: August 3, 2011
Oral Reasons for Judgment
LEDERMAN J. (ORALLY)
[1] The applicants rely only on Rule 62.02(4)(b) as the basis for obtaining leave to appeal.
[2] They must first show that there is good reason to doubt the correctness of Strathy J.’s order and secondly that matters of general importance are raised to justify an appeal.
[3] Strathy J. denied the plaintiffs a temporary stay of their own proceeding and made the order that the class proceedings would be permanently stayed if the plaintiffs did not deliver their certification record by August 31, 2011.
[4] This order was made pursuant to his discretion as Case Management Judge to require the plaintiffs to proceed in Ontario or make way for others who will.
[5] Strathy J. made no error in principle. In fact, the order is consistent with the need to have cases proceed expeditiously, and without delay, to require plaintiffs to pursue the interests of the class they purport to represent.
[6] The plaintiffs acknowledged that they do not have the resources to pursue this matter nor is it clear that they have the willingness to proceed in Ontario.
[7] As Strathy J. found, it is not appropriate to issue class proceedings merely to toll the limitation period in Ontario for Ontario members just to keep their options open. This amounts to an abuse of process both to the proposed class and to the defendants who are held in limbo.
[8] I see no reason to doubt the correctness of Strathy J.’s order.
[9] Moreover, apart from the parties themselves, it is not a matter of general public importance whether plaintiffs can commence putative class proceedings and not pursue them for reasons of their own while they await the development of other matters elsewhere.
[10] The motion for leave to appeal is therefore dismissed.
COSTS
[11] The defendants will have their costs fixed at $1,500 all inclusive, payable within thirty days.
LEDERMAN J.
Date of Reasons for Judgment: August 3, 2011
Date of Release: August 9, 2011
CITATION: Turon v. Abbott Laboratories Ltd., 2011 ONSC 4676
DIVISIONAL COURT FILE NO.: 343/11
DATE: 20110803
ONTARIO
SUPERIOR COURT OF JUSTICE
DIVISIONAL COURT
LEDERMAN J.
BETWEEN:
SARAH TURON and DIANE WILLIAMS Plaintiffs (Moving Parties)
– and –
ABBOTT LABORATORIES, LTD. and ABBOTT LABORATORIES Defendants (Respondents)
ORAL REASONS FOR JUDGMENT
LEDERMAN J.
Date of Reasons for Judgment: August 3, 2011
Date of Release: August 9, 2011