Ford et al. v. Hoffmann-La Roche Ltd. et al., [2002] O.T.C. 57 (SupCt)

JudgeCumming, J.
CourtSuperior Court of Justice of Ontario (Canada)
Case DateJanuary 28, 2002
JurisdictionOntario
Citations[2002] O.T.C. 57 (SupCt)

Ford v. Hoffmann-La Roche, [2002] O.T.C. 57 (SupCt)

MLB headnote and full text

Temp. Cite: [2002] O.T.C. TBEd. FE.007

Proceeding Under the Class Proceedings Act, 1992

Glen Ford, Vitapharm Canada Ltd., Fleming Feed Mill Ltd. and Marcy David (plaintiffs) v.  Hoffmann-La Roche Ltd., Hoffmann-La Roche Limited., Merck KgaA, Lonza A.G., Alusuisse-Lonza Canada Inc., Sumitomo Chemical Co. Ltd., Sumitomo Canada Limited/Limitée and Tanabe Seiyaku Co. Ltd. (defendants)

(File No. 00-CV-222080CP)

Glen Ford, Vitapharm Canada Ltd., Fleming Feed Mill Ltd., Aliments Breton Inc., Roger Awad and Mary Helen Awad (plaintiffs) v. Hoffmann-La Roche Ltd., Hoffmann-La Roche Limited/Limitée, Rhone-Poulenc S.A., Rhone-Poulenc Canada Inc., Rhone-Poulenc Animal Nutrition Inc., Rhone-Poulenc Inc., BASF Aktiengesellschaft, BASF Corporation, BASF Canada Inc., Eisai Co. Ltd., Takeda Chemical Industries Ltd., Takeda Canada Vitamin and Food Inc., Merck KgaA, Daiichi Pharmaceutical Company Ltd., Reinhard Steinmetz, Dieter Suter, Hugo Strotmann, Andreas Hauri, Kuno Sommer and Roland Bronnimann (defendants)

(File No. 00-CV-200045CP)

Glen Ford, Fleming Feed Mill Ltd., Aliments Breton Inc. and Kristi Cappa (plaintiffs) v. Rhone-Poulenc S.A., Rhone-Poulenc Canada Inc., Degussa-Hüls AG, Degussa Corporation, Novus International Inc. and Aventis Animal Nutrition S.A. (defendants)

(File No. 00-CV-201723CP)

Vitapharm Canada Ltd., Fleming Feed Mill Ltd., Aliments Breton Inc. and Kristi Cappa (plaintiffs) v. Degussa-Hüls AG, Degussa Corporation, Reilly Industries Inc., Reilly Chemicals S.A., Vitachem Company, Alusuisse-Lonza Canada Inc., Lonza A.G., Nepera Incorporated, Roger Noack and David Purpi (defendants)

(File No. 00-CV-200044CP)

Fleming Feed Mill Ltd., Aliments Breton Inc., Glen Ford and Marcy David (plaintiffs) v. BASF Aktiengesellschaft, BASF Corporation, BASF Canada Inc., Chinook Group Ltd., Chinook Group Inc., DCV Inc., Ducoa L.P., Akzo Nobel NV, Bioproducts Inc., Russell Cosburn, John Kennedy, Robert Samuelson, Lindell Hilling, John L. ("Pete") Fischer and Antonio Felix (defendants)

(File No. 00-CV-198647CP)

Indexed As: Ford et al. v. Hoffmann-La Roche Ltd. et al.

Court of Ontario

Superior Court of Justice

Cumming, J.

January 28, 2002.

Summary:

This headnote contains no summary.

Conflict of Laws - Topic 603

Jurisdiction - General principles - Jurisdiction simpliciter - See paragraphs 10 to 52 and 87 to 102.

Conflict of Laws - Topic 1201

Service out of jurisdiction - Torts - General - See paragraphs 63 to 102.

Conflict of Laws - Topic 9284

Practice - Stay of proceedings - Where court lacks or declines jurisdiction - See paragraphs 103 to 120.

Evidence - Topic 2106

Special modes of proof - Judicial admissions - Guilty plea in criminal trial - See paragraphs 53 to 55.

Practice - Topic 2555

Service - Service of notice, writ or statement of claim out of jurisdiction - Service without leave - See paragraphs 63 to 102.

Torts - Topic 5083

Interference with economic relations - Conspiracy - What constitutes a conspiracy - See paragraphs 56 to 62.

Cases Noticed:

R. v. Terry (R.S.), [1996] 2 S.C.R. 207; 197 N.R. 105; 76 B.C.A.C. 25; 125 W.A.C. 25; 106 C.C.C.(3d) 508; 135 D.L.R.(4th) 214, refd to. [para. 55].

Gariepy et al. v. Shell Oil Co. et al., [2000] O.T.C. 723; 51 O.R.(3d) 181 (Sup. Ct.), leave to appeal refused [2001] O.T.C. Uned. 398 (Div. Ct.), refd to. [para. 64].

Nutreco Canada Inc. et al. v. Hoffmann-La Roche et al., [2001] B.C.T.C. 1146 (S.C.), refd to. [para. 64].

Ecolab Ltd. v. Greenspace Services Ltd. et al. (1998), 107 O.A.C. 199; 38 O.R.(3d) 145 (Div. Ct.), refd to. [para. 64].

Furlan et al. v. Shell Oil Co. et al. (1999), 21 B.C.T.C. 30 (S.C.), affd. (2001), 140 B.C.A.C. 235; 229 W.A.C. 235 (C.A.), leave to appeal refused (2001), 269 N.R. 400; 155 B.C.A.C. 267; 254 W.A.C. 267 (S.C.C.), refd to. [para. 65].

Ontario New Home Warranty Program v. General Electric Co. (1998), 50 O.T.C. 333; 36 O.R.(3d) 787 (Gen. Div.), refd to. [para. 65].

Moran v. Pyle National (Canada) Ltd., [1975] 1 S.C.R. 393; 1 N.R. 122, refd to. [para. 70].

Tolofson v. Jensen and Tolofson, [1994] 3 S.C.R. 1022; 175 N.R. 161; 77 O.A.C. 81; 51 B.C.A.C. 241; 84 W.A.C. 241; [1995] 1 W.W.R. 609; 120 D.L.R.(4th) 289; 100 B.C.L.R.(2d) 1; 7 M.V.R.(3d) 202, refd to. [para. 70].

Alcoholic Beverages Litigation, In re, 95 F.R.D. 321 (E.D.N.Y.), refd to. [para. 73].

McNichol Estate v. Woldnik et al. (2001), 150 O.A.C. 68 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 75].

Overland Custom Coach Inc. et al. v. Thor Industries Inc. et al., [1999] O.T.C. Uned. C12; 46 O.R.(3d) 788 (Sup. Ct.), refd to. [para. 75].

Ville et al. v. Von Wendt (1980), 14 C.P.C. 121 (Ont. Div. Ct.), refd to. [para. 77].

Thames Steel Construction Ltd. v. Portman et al. (1980), 28 O.R.(2d) 445 (Div. Ct.), refd to. [para. 77].

Distillers Co. v. Thompson, [1971] A.C. 458 (Aust. P.C.), refd to. [para. 82].

Wilson v. Servier Canada Inc. et al., [2000] O.T.C. 884; 50 O.R.(4th) 219 (Sup. Ct.), leave to appeal refused (2000), 143 O.A.C. 279; 52 O.R.(3d) 20 (Div. Ct.), leave to appeal refused (2001), 276 N.R. 197; 154 O.A.C. 198 (S.C.C.), refd to. [para. 84].

Lemmex v. Bernard et al. (2001), 149 O.A.C. 343 (Div. Ct.), refd to. [para. 87].

Lemmex v. Sunflight Holidays Inc. - see Lemmex v. Bernard et al.

Jordan v. Schatz (2000), 140 B.C.A.C. 86; 229 W.A.C. 86; 77 B.C.L.R.(3d) 134 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 87].

Morguard Investments Ltd. et al. v. De Savoye, [1990] 3 S.C.R. 1077; 122 N.R. 81; [1991] 2 W.W.R. 217; 76 D.L.R.(4th) 256; 52 B.C.L.R.(2d) 160, refd to. [para. 88].

Antwerp Bulkcarriers, N.V., Re (2001), 279 N.R. 154 (S.C.C.), refd to. [para. 89].

Amchem Products Inc. et al. v. Workers' Compensation Board (B.C.), [1993] 1 S.C.R. 897; 150 N.R. 321; 23 B.C.A.C. 1; 39 W.A.C. 1; 102 D.L.R.(4th) 96; [1993] 3 W.W.R. 441; 77 B.C.L.R.(2d) 62; 14 C.P.C.(3d) 1, refd to. [para. 89].

Hunt v. Lac d'Amiante du Québec ltée et al., [1993] 4 S.C.R. 289; 161 N.R. 81; 37 B.C.A.C. 161; 60 W.A.C. 161; [1994] 1 W.W.R. 129; 109 D.L.R.(4th) 16; 85 B.C.L.R.(2d) 1; 21 C.P.C.(3d) 269, refd to. [para. 89].

Hunt v. T & N plc et al. - see Hunt v. Lac d'Amiante du Québec ltée et al.

Dodd v. Gambin Associates, [1997] O.J. No. 1330 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 89].

Business Communications Inc. v. Web Dream Inc., [2001] O.T.C. Uned. 250 (Sup. Ct.), refd to. [para. 89].

MacDonald v. Lasnier (1994), 21 O.R.(3d) 177 (Gen. Div.), refd to. [para. 92].

Harrington v. Dow Corning Corp. (1996), 22 B.C.L.R.(3d) 97 (S.C.), affd. (2000), 144 B.C.A.C. 51; 236 W.A.C. 51; 193 D.L.R.(4th) 67 (C.A.), leave to appeal refused (2001), 276 N.R. 200; 162 B.C.A.C. 320; 264 W.A.C. 320 (S.C.C.), refd to. [para. 93].

R. v. Libman, [1985] 2 S.C.R. 178; 62 N.R. 161; 12 O.A.C. 33; 21 C.C.C.(3d) 206, refd to. [para. 101].

Long v. Citi Club, [1995] O.J. No. 1411 (Gen. Div.), refd to. [para. 101].

Mutual Life Assurance Co. of Canada v. Peat Marwick et al. (1998), 125 O.A.C. 179 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 106].

Fidelity Management and Research Co. v. Gulf Canada Resources Ltd. (1995), 25 O.R.(3d) 548 (Gen. Div.), refd to. [para. 107].

Pineridge Capital Group Inc. v. Anderson, [1995] B.C.J. No. 2601 (S.C.), refd to. [para. 113].

Statutes Noticed:

Rules of Civil Procedure (Ont.), rule 17.02 [para. 63].

Authors and Works Noticed:

Holmestead, George Smith, and Watson, Garry D., Ontario Civil Practice (2001), pp. 17-14 to 17-16, 17-32 to 17-38 [para. 90]; 17-46 to 17-47, 17-47 to 17-48, 17-51 to 17-52, 17-52 to 17-53 [para. 63]; 17-55 to 17-61, 17-74 to 17-77 [para. 103].

Hague Conference on Private International Law, Synthesis of the work of the Special Commission of March 1998 on International Jurisdiction and Foreign Judgments in Civil and Criminal Matters (1998), Preliminary Document No. 9, art. 129.2 [para. 82].

Kessedjian, Catherine, Hague Conference on Private International Law, Synthesis of the work of the Special Commission of March 1998 on International Jurisdiction and Foreign Judgments in Civil and Criminal Matters (1998), Preliminary Document No. 9, art. 129.2 [para. 82].

Nygh, Peter and Pocar, Fausto, Hague Conference on Private International Law, Report of the Special Commission (A Commentary on Art. 9 of the Preliminary Draft Convention on Jurisdiction and Foreign Judgments in Civil and Commercial Matters) (1998), Preliminary Document No. 11, generally [para. 82].

Walker, Janet, Multi-Jurisdiction Class Actions in Canada, Class Actions: Where are we at and where are we going? (2001), generally [para. 113].

Walker, Janet, Rule 17: Service outside Ontario, in Holmestead, George Smith, and Watson, Garry D., Ontario Civil Practice (2001), pp. 17-14 to 17-16, 17-32 to 17-38 [para. 90]; 17-46 to 17-47, 17-47 to 17-48, 17-51 to 17-52, 17-52 to 17-53 [para. 63]; 17-55 to 17-61, 17-74 to 17-77 [para. 103].

Watson, G.D., and Au, F., Constitutional Limits on Service Ex Juris: Unanswered Questions from Morguard (2000), 23 Adv. Q. 167, generally [para. 91].

Counsel:

Michael Eizenga and Joe Fiorante, for the plaintiffs in all actions;

William Vanveen and Francois-Baril, for Hoffmann-La Roche Ltd. in all actions;

Donald Houston and Jason Markwell, for Lonza A.G. in all actions;

David W. Kent, for BASF Aktiengesellschaft in all actions;

F. Paul Morrison and John P. Brown, for Degussa-Hüls AG and Degussa Corp.

These actions were heard on October 4, 8 and 9, 2001, before Cumming, J., of the Ontario Superior Court, who released the following decision on January 28, 2002.

Please note: The following judgment has not been edited.

To continue reading

Request your trial

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT