Interprovincial Consolidations

• Author: Craig Jones
• Pages: 199-209

CHAPTER

NINE

Interprovincial

Consolidations

A.

INTRODUCTION

The

purpose

of

consolidating proceedings

is to

save expense, avoid

a

multiplic-

ity of

pleadings

and

proceedings

and

avoid inconsistent judicial

findings.1

As

such,

the

purposes

of

consolidation

parallel

closely

those

of

class

proceedings,

particularly

because mass torts

that

form

the

basis

for

class actions

are

frequently

committed

in

several jurisdictions. However,

the

structure

of the

federal

system

might

allow

concurrent,

and

even overlapping,

class

claims

to

proceed

simulta-

neously

in

situations where individual claims would almost certainly

not.2

When viewed with

the

purpose

of

maximum aggregation,

I

have suggested

that

national opt-out classes appear

to be the

optimal method

of

adjudicating

mass torts which have

an

impact across provincial borders. This requires that

we

consider

the

question

of

interprovincial

consolidations, whether they involve

numerous

province-wide actions

or

several overlapping "national

class"

actions.

I

canvass below several options available

to

courts

and

legislatures

to

facili-

tate

consolidations

of

several

smaller

or

overlapping actions into national

classes,

1.

Pilon

v.

Janveaux,

[2000] O.J.

No.

4743

(Sup.

Ct.

J.);

The

City

of

Toronto

v.

British

American

Oil

Company Limited, [1946] O.W.N.

398

(Master);

Goldhar

v.

J.M.

Publications

Inc.,

[2000] O.J.

No. 843

(Sup.

Ct.

J.).

2. In an

ordinary individualistic litigation,

the

defendant

has a

strong motive

to

block

a

plaintiff

from

proceeding

in two

different fora. With class claims, this

is not

nec-

essarily

the

case,

as the

defendant

may

benefit substantially from allowing

the

plaintiff

class

to be

split into

two or

more.

199