Share on LinkedInShare on LinkedIn

ARTICLE · 09 MARCH 2004

So You Thought You Had a "Global" Settlement in that Class Action?

McMillan LLP
McMillan LLP
Contributor
McMillan LLP

McMillan LLP

The firm : McMillan LLP is one of Canada’s leading national law firms with offices in Montreal,...

View firm profile
Explore more from McMillan LLP

The recent decision of the Ontario Superior Court in <I>Currie v. McDonald’s Restaurants, </I>[2004] O.J. No. 83 paves the way for U.S. class action settlements to bind a Canadian class, provided the Canadian class receives adequate notice. It is a cautionary tale, however, for U.S. defence counsel who attempt a "global" settlement for their clients.

CanadaInternational Law

The recent decision of the Ontario Superior Court in Currie v. McDonald’s Restaurants, [2004] O.J. No. 83 paves the way for U.S. class action settlements to bind a Canadian class, provided the Canadian class receives adequate notice. It is a cautionary tale, however, for U.S. defence counsel who attempt a "global" settlement for their clients.

Currie

is believed to be the first Canadian decision to apply the recent ruling of the Supreme Court of Canada in Beals v. Saldanha [2003] S.C.J. No. 77 in a class action context. Beals, released in December of 2003, established that Canadian courts should enforce a U.S. Court decision where the U.S. court has a "real and substantial connection" with either the subject matter of the suit or the defendant. The ruling in Currie suggests Beals can be used to bind a Canadian class in a U.S. settlement, but to do so effectively you have to be careful of Canadian principles of "natural justice".

We operate a free-to-view policy, asking only that you register in order to read all of our content. Please login or register to view the rest of this article.

See more popular content from