In related pan-national class proceedings, the court considered whether supervisory superior court judges may sit together outside their home provinces to hear motions in implementing a settlement.
The court held that, where subject-matter and personal jurisdiction exist and no coercive powers are required, judges may exercise discretionary authority to sit extraprovincially if local law does not prohibit it.
The court concluded this authority is available under the relevant class proceedings statutes and, in any event, aligns with inherent jurisdiction principles.
The court rejected a mandatory video-link condition, while confirming that openness and practical access remain relevant discretionary considerations.
The appeals were allowed and the cross-appeal was dismissed.
