Case information

Civil Procedure – Class actions – Stay – Private international law – Foreign judgments – Lis pendens – Whether duplicative class action proceedings should be allowed to proceed simultaneously in different provinces simply because Canadian provinces have adopted conflicting approaches to motions to stay – More specifically, whether the contextual approach or strict approach should prevail in Quebec in regards to motions to stay in the context of multi-jurisdictional actions – Civil Code of Québec, art. 3137 – Code of Civil Procedure, CQLR c. 25-01, art. 577.

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.

The respondent, Mr. Li, applied for authorization to institute a class action against the applicants, Equifax Inc. and Equifax Canada Co. (“Equifax”), after third persons had gained access to personal credit information of the members of the proposed class that had been gathered by Equifax and stored electronically.

Before the hearing of the application for authorization, Equifax applied to the Quebec Superior Court under art. 3137 of the Civil Code of Québec (“C.C.Q.”) and arts. 18 and 577 of the Code of Civil Procedure, CQLR, c. C-25.01, to stay the action until a final judgment is rendered in one of the other class actions brought elsewhere in Canada (in Ontario in particular) that will include Quebec residents. Equifax argued that those actions are based on the same facts and allegations.

The Superior Court judge dismissed Equifax’s application primarily on the basis that Mr. Li’s application for authorization in Québec had been filed before the Ontario application and that one of the conditions under art. 3137 C.C.Q. was therefore not met. The judge noted, moreover, that in the circumstances, the protection of the rights and interests of Quebec residents strongly favoured continuing with the Quebec proceedings. The Quebec Court of Appeal dismissed Equifax’s motion for leave to appeal. It explained that the Superior Court’s decision was discretionary and contained no palpable and overriding error that warranted its intervention.