Case information

Civil procedure — Class action — Authorization to institute class action — Conditions for authorization of action — Does an authorization judge’s screening role require it, on its own initiative, to consider legal syllogisms which are neither alleged nor argued in its assessment of the arguable case criterion under art. 575(2) of the Code of Civil Procedure, CQLR, c. C-25.01 — Did the Court of Appeal exceed its limited power to intervene and fail to respect the fundamental principles of civil procedure? — Is the onus on the applicant to allege and establish an arguable legal syllogism pursuant to art. 575(2)?

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, Mrs. Davies, applied before the Quebec Superior Court for authorization, pursuant to art. 575 of the Code of Civil Procedure, CQLR, c. C-25.01 (“C.C.P.”), to institute a class action against the applicant, Air Canada, on behalf of Air Canada retirees. The respondent claimed that over the past several decades, Air Canada consistently undertook to grant and continue to make available, including upon retirement, free and reduced travel (“FRT”) passes to all employees with at least six months’ experience and to ensure that priority for the use of those passes would be determined by seniority. The respondent alleged that Air Canada breached those undertakings by issuing FRT passes with higher priority to its current employees and, in doing so, caused an injury to its retirees by substantially reducing the usefulness of their travel benefit. The respondent sought pecuniary, non-pecuniary and punitive damages.

The authorization judge in the Quebec Superior Court dismissed the application for authorization to institute a class action, concluding that the requirement in art. 575(2) C.C.P. was not met as the facts alleged in the application did not justify the conclusions sought. The Quebec Court of Appeal unanimously allowed the respondent’s appeal in order to authorize the class action to proceed, except in relation to the claim for punitive damages.