Case information

None.

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.

Class actions — Partial settlement — Approval of settlement agreement — Bar Order — Whether contribution and indemnity is available to co-conspirators in Canada — Bar order provides that, if the Court determines that there is a right of contribution and indemnity, the plaintiff class cannot claim or recover damages attributable to settling defendants from the non settling defendants — What should be the appropriate model for Bar Orders in Canada — Where is the constitutional juridical, and tortuous intersection between provincial and Federal statutes — Putting a stop to comparison shopping for forums in Canada.

A class action alleged that four chocolate manufacturers (Cadbury, Hershey, Mars and Nestle) conspired to fix, and did fix, maintain or stabilize prices of chocolate confectionary products in Canada and that a chocolate distributor (Itwal Limited) engaged in price maintenance. The causes of action were the intentional torts of conspiracy and interference with economic relations, and a statutory claim for damages under s. 36 of the Competition Act, R.S. 1985, c. C 34, for conduct contrary to Part VI of that Act.

Mr. Main settled with Cadbury and Itwal. The settlement agreements contained, inter alia, a “bar order” which protects the settling defendant from claims for contribution and indemnity from its co defendants and provides that, “if the Court determines that there is a right of contribution and indemnity or other claim over . . . the [plaintiffs] shall not be entitled to claim or recover from the Non Settling Defendants that portion of any damages . . . that corresponds to the Proportionate Liability of the Cadbury Releasees”. The non settling defendants objected to the bar orders as proposed.

The case management judge, adopting and approving the reasons in Osmun v. Cadbury Adams Canada Inc., 2010 ONSC 2643, approved the settlement agreements. The Court of Appeal dismissed the appeals.