Court File and Parties
Court File No.: CV-17-579535CP Date: 20171130 Superior Court of Justice - Ontario
Re: Romeo Maione, Plaintiff – AND – Uber Technologies, Inc., Uber Canada Inc., Uber B.V., and Rasier Operations B.V., Defendants
Before: Justice E.M. Morgan
Counsel: David Wingfield, for the Plaintiff Julie Rosenthal and Michael Wilson, for the Defendants.
Heard: November 30, 2017
Case Conference – Endorsement
Endorsement
1Counsel met with me this morning for a first case conference in this matter. This proposed class action entails a claim by consumers of anti-competitive conduct contrary to s. 45 of the Competition Act, RSC 1985 c. C-34.
2I am advised that another action is underway in this court against the same Defendants. That action, Heller v Uber Technologies, Inc. et al., Court File No. CV-17-567946CP (the “Heller Action”), is also a proposed class action. It entails a claim by drivers of breach of the Employment Standards Act, SO 2000, c. 41. Counsel for the Defendants points out that in the within action the Plaintiff has pleaded, among other things, that Uber drivers are self-employed, while the plaintiff in the Heller Action seeks, among other things, a declaration that Uber drivers are properly classified as employees.
3Given this pair of challenges, the Defendants are contemplating a motion for a stay of proceedings of the within action until the Heller Action resolves the question of the Uber drivers’ status. Counsel for the Plaintiff says that he will respond to that motion when and if it is brought, but that meanwhile there is no reason not to set a timetable for the steps leading up to a certification motion in this action. I agree that a timetable should be set today, leaving sufficient space up front for a potential stay motion.
Timetable
4The following timetable for a certification motion has been agreed upon by counsel for both sides. I set it out here on the understanding that it can always be revisited and revised in the event that something happens in the Heller Action or otherwise that would necessitate a change.
| Event | Date |
|---|---|
| Plaintiff to deliver motion record | April 2, 2018 |
| Defendants to deliver responding materials | July 6, 2018 |
| Plaintiff to deliver reply materials | July 31, 2018 |
| Completion of cross-examinations | September 14, 2018 |
| Refusals motions, if any | to be set |
| Plaintiff to deliver factum | October 19, 2018 |
| Defendants to deliver factum | November 16, 2018 |
| Plaintiff to deliver reply factum, if any | November 23, 2018 |
| Two day certification motion to be heard | By December 14, 2018 |
Morgan J.
Date: November 30, 2017