Share on LinkedInShare on LinkedIn

ARTICLE · 27 MAY 2025

Raising The "Low Bar": Plaintiffs Seek New Strategies To Prove Common Issues For Certification

Bennett Jones LLP
Bennett Jones LLP
Contributor
Bennett Jones LLP

Bennett Jones LLP

Bennett Jones is one of Canada’s premier business law firms. With deep experience in complex...

View firm profile
Explore more from Bennett Jones LLP

A plaintiff's obligation to establish "some basis in fact" for a common issue is acknowledged as a low bar. Several Canadian appellate courts have, however, confirmed a "two-step test"...

CanadaLitigation, Mediation & Arbitration

A plaintiff's obligation to establish "some basis in fact" for a common issue is acknowledged as a low bar. Several Canadian appellate courts have, however, confirmed a "two-step test" as the standard analytical framework. Under the two-step test, plaintiffs must not only show that the proposed common issues can be answered across the class, but must also establish, as a matter of fact, that the proposed issues exist. The two-step test stands in contrast to a one-step test that considers only if the proposed common issue can be answered across the class.

The added requirement of proving the existence of proposed common issues means plaintiffs need sufficient factual evidence at the certification stage. Looking forward, representative plaintiffs may pursue innovative strategies to gather the evidence needed to meet their evidentiary burden. One such avenue, considered below, involves requesting pre-certification discovery.

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