Share on LinkedInShare on LinkedIn

ARTICLE · 30 APRIL 2019

Class Counsel Fee The Determinative Factor For Carriage

Borden Ladner Gervais LLP
Borden Ladner Gervais LLP
Contributor
Borden Ladner Gervais LLP

Borden Ladner Gervais LLP

With over 750 lawyers, intellectual property agents and other professionals, BLG services...

View firm profile
Explore more from Borden Ladner Gervais LLP

In August 2018, a fire at 650 Parliament Street in Toronto damaged two residential towers.

CanadaLitigation, Mediation & Arbitration

In August 2018, a fire at 650 Parliament Street in Toronto damaged two residential towers. The blaze left hundreds of residents without a home, and several with injuries. Two competing class actions soon materialized, both commenced by experienced class counsel. Class counsel did not form a consortium, and Justice Belobaba of the Ontario Superior Court of Justice was forced to determine which of the two law firms should have carriage of the action.

In his decision in Chu v. Parwell Investments Inc., Justice Belobaba, having found all other factors to be essentially equal, selected one firm over the other on the basis of the fee arrangements proposed.

In reaching his decision, Justice Belobaba considered the experience of the competing firms, the parties proposed in the competing class actions, the causes of action alleged, and the states of preparation, as between the competing firms. He found no clear winner on these factors: competing class counsel had

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.

The content of this article is intended to provide a general guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought about your specific circumstances.

See more popular content from