Robert L. Armstrong

The defendant bank sought leave to appeal a decision certifying a class action for unpaid overtime on behalf of its retail branch employees.

The bank argued that the certification decision conflicted with another recent decision denying certification in a similar overtime class action against a different bank, and that there was good reason to doubt the correctness of the decision.

The Divisional Court granted leave to appeal on both grounds, finding a clear conflict in principle regarding whether systemic duties and implied contractual terms could overcome a lack of commonality, and noting the general public importance of the issues raised.

The appellant appealed the dismissal of his motion to certify a product liability class action regarding allegedly defective door latches in certain Ford vehicles.

The Divisional Court upheld the motion judge's findings that the claims did not raise common issues, as the differences in door latch mechanisms across vehicle models meant that findings for one vehicle could not be extrapolated to others.

The court also agreed that a class proceeding was not the preferable procedure, noting the regulatory role of Transport Canada, and that the appellant was not an appropriate representative plaintiff due to his lack of involvement and the inadequate litigation plan.

The appeal was dismissed.

The appellant, Jazz Air LP, appealed a costs award of $160,000 on a substantial indemnity basis following the dismissal of its motion for an interlocutory injunction against the respondents.

The appellant argued the amount was excessive for a one-day motion and that substantial indemnity was unwarranted.

The Divisional Court dismissed the appeal, finding that the motion judge did not err in principle given the unsubstantiated allegations of conspiracy, the tactical timing of the motion, and the reasonable expectation that the respondents would spare no expense to defend against an injunction that would have catastrophic consequences for their business.