Law Times

April 15, 2019

The premier weekly newspaper for the legal profession in Ontario

Issue link:

Contents of this Issue


Page 2 of 15

LAW TIMES COVERING ONTARIO'S LEGAL SCENE | APRIL 15, 2019 3 BY SHANNON K ARI For Law Times JUDGES presiding over class action proceedings should be cautious about using the prin- ciples set out by the Supreme Court in Hryniak to narrow lit- igation at the certification stage, the Divisional Court stated in a case about compensation for ju- nior hockey players. The three-judge panel made the comments in Berg et al. v. Canadian Hockey League et al., a ruling that overturned the decision by Justice Paul Perell to refuse to certify some of the plaintiffs' claims in the class ac- tion over whether the players are employees of their teams. "In Hryniak, the cry for pro- portionality is directed at com- ing up with efficient and fair procedures for resolving dis- putes. It is not a direction to use what is essentially a procedural motion such as certification to make decisions of substance about what properly pleaded causes of action parties are en- titled to advance," wrote justices Harriet Sachs, Julie Thorburn and Robert Reid in a joint deci- sion of the court. "A decision to eliminate causes of action is a substantive decision, not a procedural one," the court explained in its deci- sion released on April 3. Ted Charney, co-counsel for the plaintiffs along with Steven Barrett at Goldblatt Partners LLP, says they are pleased that the Divisional Court certified all of the claims including breach of contract, negligence and con- spiracy, as well the causes of ac- tion accepted by Perell. "They are all essential to the plaintiffs' theory of the case. The Divisional Court accepted the argument that it is not up to the court to determine how a case should be litigated. Let the lawyers decide on strategy," says Charney, who heads Charney Lawyers in Toronto. Lauren Tomasich, a partner at Oslers LLP in Toronto, notes that, unlike a summary judg- ment motion, there will not be a full record before a judge at the certification stage in a class ac- tion. "The Divisional Court is saying that this is not an oppor- tunity to re-craft the pleadings," notes Tomasich, whose practice focuses on class action defence. If a defendant is alleging over- pleading, then there will need to be evidence presented "from a procedural perspective" about why certain causes of action should not be allowed to go for- ward, says Tomasich, who is not involved in the junior hockey player litigation. The class action is one of three parallel proceedings in Alberta, Quebec and Ontario involving former "major junior league" players. In the Ontario action, one of the main claims is that the players did not receive the minimum employment ben- efits they were entitled to under the Employment Standards Act. In a notice explaining who may be eligible to the join the class, the plaintiffs' lawyer states that if the action is ultimately success- ful, former players may receive as much as $10,000 per season plus overtime. Since the 2013-14 season, the standard player agreement in the Ontario Hockey League has stat- ed that it is not a contract of em- ployment and any compensation is referred to as a reimbursement or honorarium. For every full season, a player is entitled to a one-year "scholarship" to attend a post-secondary institution. The court heard that the three major junior leagues in Canada paid out a total of $6.2 million in scholarships in 2014-15. Regardless of the outcome of the class action, the proceeding will not have an impact on cur- rent and future junior hockey players in the province. At the request of the OHL, the Ontario government enacted regulations last fall that explicitly exempt players on a "major junior ice hockey team" from the protec- tions of the provincial employ- ment provisions. Other ex- empted groups under the statute include adults in provincial jails and young offenders on some form of work release program as part of their sentence. Patricia Jackson, a senior partner at Torys LLP in Toronto and lead counsel for the defen- dant hockey leagues, declined to comment as the legal proceed- ings are ongoing. In his decision to exclude some of the causes of action, Perell found that they were re- dundant and already addressed by the core question in the litiga- tion. The Divisional Court dis- agreed and found that he over- stepped his role at this stage of the litigation. As well, it found that Perell's analysis on whether a class ac- tion is a preferable procedure did not use a comparative analysis as outlined by the Supreme Court in AIC Limited v. Fischer and focused instead on proportion- ality and redundancy. "This is not the inquiry that AIC Lim- ited mandates," the Divisional Court said. LT Ted Charney says that, in a recent ruling, a panel of judges 'accepted the argument that it is not up to the court to determine how a case should be litigated.' NEWS Eliminating causes of action is 'substantive decision' Judges need to be careful in class action certifications JONATHAN ROSENTHAL RE-ELECT WHAT OTHERS SAY: "Jonathan is a strong voice for promoting access to justice and transparency at the Law Society.... He was one of the hardest working Benchers during my time as treasurer." Paul Schabas, Past Treasurer "Jonathan Rosenthal is a compassionate and dedicated advocate whose FOHDUDQGSURJUHVVLYHYRLFHKDVPDGHDVLJQL¿FDQWFRQWULEXWLRQWRRXU profession." Brian Greenspan "a strong voice at convocation" Ian Hull "[Jonathan] is a true leader—in legal education; in the criminal defence EDUDQGDVKHKDVVKRZQRYHUWKHODVWIRXU\HDUVLQWKHEURDGHUOHJDO profession." Gerald Chan, President, Federation of Asian Canadian Lawyers ³KDUGZRUNLQJGHGLFDWHGDQGHQHUJHWLF´ Sheila Block ³$VRQHRIWKHJUHDWFRQWULEXWRUVWRWKHOHJDOSURIHVVLRQLWLVQRVXUSULVH WKDW-RQDWKDQKDVEHHQDGHGLFDWHGDQGWKRXJKWIXOEHQFKHURYHUWKHODVW four years." Malcolm Mercer, Treasurer ENDORSED BY THE FOLLOWING ORGANIZATIONS: Federation of Asian Canadian Lawyers Canadian Association of Black Lawyers $VVRFLDWLRQRI/DZ2I¿FHUVRIWKH&URZQ Ontario Criminal Lawyers' Association Experienced. Dedicated. Progressive. What you need in a bencher. Because principles matter. Untitled-1 1 2019-04-10 10:00 AM

Articles in this issue

Links on this page

Archives of this issue

view archives of Law Times - April 15, 2019