Following the certification of a class action on behalf of franchisees against a franchisor, a group of franchisees opposed to the action waged a campaign encouraging others to opt out.
The motion judge invalidated the opt-out notices received after the campaign began, finding the campaign coercive and misleading.
The Court of Appeal allowed the appeal, holding that the motion judge erred in drawing an inference of intimidation without direct evidence and in holding the opposing franchisees to a standard of objectivity.
The communications amounted to acceptable intra-class debate, and the opt-out notices were reinstated.
