Share on LinkedInShare on LinkedIn

ARTICLE · 26 JANUARY 2022

The Act (Mostly) Means What It Says: The First Judicial Insights Into Dismissal For Delay Under The Class Proceedings Act

On October 1, 2020, section 29.1 of the Class Proceedings Act ("CPA") took effect. This provision, designed to address the phenomenon of class actions being started and...

CanadaLitigation, Mediation & Arbitration

On October 1, 2020, section 29.1 of the Class Proceedings Act  ("CPA")  took effect. This provision, designed to address the phenomenon of class actions being started and then languishing in the system without advancement, provides for a mandatory dismissal of an action where, by the one year anniversary of the claim, the plaintiffs certification record has not been filed or there is no established timetable (by consent or Court order). This was a significant improvement to a class actions system that previously had no real tool for dealing with class actions that were languishing.

On January 14, 2022, Justice Belobaba issued the first reported decision interpreting section 29.1 in Bourque v Insight Productions. In his decision, Justice Belobaba offers a clear reminder that, sometimes, legislative provisions simply mean what they say. Despite that direction, the Court's decision is also a good reminder that sometimes in litigation when the Court closes a door, it

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