Sharma V. Timminco Limited - Limiting Suspension Under Section 28 Of The Class Proceedings Act

I. OVERVIEW

A recent decision of the Ontario Court of Appeal in Sharma v. Timminco Limited ¹ (Timminco) suggests that a plaintiff and/or class members in a class action must comply with time-limited leave, notice and other pre-conditions to litigation and cannot rely on the suspension of limitation periods under section 28 of the Ontario Class Proceedings Act, 1992 ² (the CPA) to avoid these requirements. As a result, the decision may give defendants in class proceedings potential defences where plaintiffs and/or class members in class actions fail to comply with such pre-conditions before asserting statutory causes of action under, among other statutes, the Securities Act, ³ the Arthur Wishart Act (Franchise Disclosure), 2000 ⁴ (the Wishart Act) and the Consumer Protection Act. ⁵ The decision may also have implications for class actions against the Crown due to the notice requirements under the Proceedings Against the Crown Act.⁶