The appellant courier company appealed a class action certification order, arguing the motions judge erred in certifying a common issue regarding whether its customs brokerage services were 'unsolicited' under the Consumer Protection Act.
The appellant contended that determining whether services were unsolicited required an individualized inquiry into each consumer's knowledge and intent.
The Divisional Court dismissed the appeal, finding the claim was systemic and based on standard form contracts that did not mention brokerage fees, meaning the issue could be determined on a common basis without individualized inquiries.
