Case information

Civil procedure ? Class action ? Claim ? Recovery method ? Disclosure of members’ identities ? In context where evidence concerning amounts owed and members’ identities is in respondents’ possession, whether there is legal basis for denying other party access to this information ? Code of Civil Procedure, c. C 25.01, arts. 20 and 186.

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.

In a class action, the respondents, TELUS Mobility and TELUS Communications Company, were ordered by the Quebec Court of Appeal to reimburse part of the phone contract termination fees paid by the members of the class covered by the action. The Court of Appeal ordered that the fees be recovered on an individual basis (Masson v. Telus Mobilité, 2019 QCCA 1106). On August 17, 2020, the Superior Court rendered a decision (2020 QCCS 2525) concerning the management of the claims and ordered the respondents to disclose certain information about the accounts of the members who were likely to claim reimbursement. However, the Superior Court declined to order that the exact amounts be shared with the representative plaintiffs in the class action because of the recovery method ordered by the Court of Appeal. Following the filing of that information, the representative plaintiffs’ lawyers from the applicant BGA inc. applied to have their fees approved. On December 23, 2020, the Superior Court awarded fees equivalent to 35 percent (including tax) of the amount of any claim to be paid by the respondents (2020 QCCS 4496). In that decision, the Superior Court estimated the number of members likely to file a claim while also considering the possibility that some members would decide not to declare anything. Following that new decision, the applicant law firms, BGA inc. and Cabinet BG inc., applied for disclosure of the class members’ identities as a conservatory measure. They wished to obtain creditor status, the identities, contact information and account numbers of the members of the class modified by the court, as well as the amounts likely to be claimed by the members. The respondents filed an application to dismiss accompanied by an application to have the proceeding declared abusive. The Superior Court dismissed the applicants’ application for disclosure of the members’ identities and declared that such an application was an abuse of right. The Court of Appeal dismissed the motion de bene esse for leave to appeal.