Summary

Keywords

Civil procedure — Stay — Proper common law test for a stay of one proceeding in favour of another — Factors courts should consider when granting a stay pursuant to statutory powers under provincial class proceedings legislation — Whether s. 14 of Class Proceedings Act, SA 2000, c. C 16.5, and its equivalents in other provinces apply to proposed class actions not yet certified or give courts jurisdiction to stay an action in one province in favour of a class proceeding in another province?

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.

Mr. Hamm, Mr. Keepness and Mr. Tobin were held in administrative segregation in a federal institution. A habeas corpus application found the detentions unreasonable and a breach of the duty of procedural fairness. They commenced a civil action for damages. The Attorney General applied for a stay of proceedings and argued the action overlaps with a class proceeding. A Master in Chambers dismissed the application. The Court of Queen’s Bench allowed an appeal and imposed a stay. The Court of Appeal dismissed an appeal.

Lower Court Rulings