The appellants, a restaurant franchisor and its food distributor, appealed a Divisional Court decision certifying a class action brought by former franchisees.
The franchisees alleged the appellants engaged in a price maintenance scheme, civil conspiracy, and breach of contract by charging exorbitant prices for supplies.
The Court of Appeal upheld the certification, finding that the motion judge erred by focusing too heavily on the individual nature of damages and failing to recognize that the breach of the Competition Act, conspiracy, and breach of contract claims constituted valid common issues.
The court also affirmed that aggregate damages provisions under the Class Proceedings Act could potentially be utilized at trial.