Share on LinkedInShare on LinkedIn

ARTICLE · 13 MAY 2013

A Fair Fight: Issue Estoppel And Parallel Proceedings

McCarthy Tétrault
McCarthy Tétrault
Contributor
McCarthy Tétrault

McCarthy Tétrault

Built on a unique model of collaboration, innovation and efficiency, McCarthy Tétrault delivers...

View firm profile
Explore more from McCarthy Tétrault

The Supreme Court of Canada has recently considered when a civil court should bar claims on the basis that the issues in dispute were finally disposed of in a prior administrative proceeding.

CanadaLitigation, Mediation & Arbitration

Litigation has to be fair to both sides of a dispute. Finality is an important aspect of that fairness. Where parallel proceedings have differences in process, procedure, or purpose, is it fair to allow the same parties to litigate the same issues? Or does the fairness of finality take precedence over considerations of process and purpose?

In Penner v. Niagara (Regional Police Services Board), 2013 SCC 19, the Supreme Court of Canada considered when a civil court should bar claims on the basis that the issues in dispute were finally disposed of in a prior administrative proceeding. A 4-3 majority of the Court affirmed the flexible test for issue estoppel, set out in Danyluk v. Ainsworth Technologies Inc., 2001 SCC 44, and its requirement that the judge exercise discretion not to apply the doctrine if it would result in unfairness or an unjust result.

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