Share on LinkedInShare on LinkedIn

ARTICLE · 20 AUGUST 2013

Cy Près Recipient Must Not Be Or Appear To Be Connected To Class Counsel

In Sorenson v easyhome Ltd, 2013 ONSC 40172, the plaintiff brought a motion seeking approval of a settlement agreement and the class counsel’s fees.

CanadaLitigation, Mediation & Arbitration
Tabby Morshedizadeh (Student-At-Law)
Tabby Morshedizadeh (Student-At-Law)
Author LinkedIn connections

In Sorenson v easyhome Ltd, 2013 ONSC 4017, the plaintiff brought a motion seeking approval of a settlement agreement and the class counsel's fees. The motion was on consent with the exception of the plaintiff's selection of the Canadian Foundation for Advancement of Investor Rights ("FAIR"), an organization dedicated to enforcing shareholders' rights, as the cy près recipient.  After the settlement was finalized, the defendants learned that the class counsel, Siskinds, had provided pro bono services to FAIR, and that FAIR and Siskinds made similar submissions to the Ontario Securities Commission with regard to a particular OSC Staff Notice.

Justice Perell explained access to justice for class members and behaviour modification on the part of defendants are factors to be considered when deciding whether or not to approve a particular cy près distribution.  The objectives require class members to indirectly benefit from the distribution exclusively, and thus preclude

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