Summary
37229
Smith & Nephew Inc. v. Milana Warner
(Alberta) (Civil) (By Leave)
Keywords
None.
Summary
Case summaries are prepared by the Office of the Registrar of the Supreme Court of Canada (Law Branch). Please note that summaries are not provided to the Judges of the Court. They are placed on the Court file and website for information purposes only.
Civil Procedure – Class Actions – Certification – Whether the rational relationship requirement applies to narrow a class definition where the evidence establishes that a majority of the proposed class has suffered no harm and therefore has no cause of action in negligence against the applicant – Does the requirement for a plaintiff to demonstrate a “credible or plausible” methodology for proving causation apply outside the indirect-purchaser context – Whether the rules of evidence are relaxed on a certification motion – Whether there are conflicting appellate decisions – Class Proceedings Act, SA 2003, c. C-16.5, s. 5.
In September 2013, the respondent, who is the proposed representative plaintiff, commenced an action against the manufacturer for damages resulting from the Birmingham Hip Resurfacing procedure. The statement of claim was filed under the Class Proceedings Act, SA 2003, c. C-16.5 and the respondent applied for certification of her action as a class action. The respondent’s application for certification of a class proceeding was dismissed. A majority of the Court of Appeal allowed the appeal. The matter was remitted to the trial court to resolve details respecting the definition of the class, the framing of the common issues, providing notice to class members, establishing a litigation plan, and other particulars. Slatter J.A., dissenting, would have certified the action, but differed on the class definition.
Lower Court Rulings
Court of Queen’s Bench of Alberta
1301 01931, 2015 ABQB 139
Court of Appeal of Alberta (Calgary)
1501-0077-AC, 2016 ABCA 223
- Date modified: