Introduction

• Author: Harvey T Strosberg, QC
• Pages: 167-169

167

INTRODUCTION

Welcome to a new year and new issue of the Canadian Cla ss Action Review.

As always, we are pleased to present our readers with a number of well-

written and intere sting articles. This issue features the winning sub-

mission from t he 2015 Harvey T Strosberg e ssay prize competition, along

with two other highly raked entries. Additionally, among the other f‌ine

articles, we are excited to include a follow-up article to a paper we pub-

lished in CCAR 7.1 (2011). Thus, without further adieu, let us brief‌ly

introduce the article s featured in this issue.

The 2015 Harvey T Strosberg essay pr ize-winning paper was submit-

ted by Lauren Pearce. In “Catch and Relea se: Class Actions a nd Solvent

Third Parties under t he CCAA,” she considers a number of the important

policy issues raised by third party release s, particularly where they pur-

port to foreclose or settle tenable cla ss actions. She argues that the CCA A

releases determ ining liability on a non-opt-out basis, coupled with the

remedial purpose of the CCAA in facilitating swift and effective corpor-

ate restructur ings, suggest that class action defendants w ill be strongly

incentivized to h ave the claims against them resolved in this manner.

The paper states that third party releases are clearly here to stay, and

offers specif‌ic, practical lessons for plaintiffs’ counsel seeking to realize

favourable outcomes under the CCAA.

Regan S Christen sen’s article, “No Right Without a Remedy? The

Potential Role of Class Actions in Police Accountability and Defending

Charter Rights,” was a highly ranked entry i n the aforementioned essay

competition. His paper discusses the role that class actions could poten-

tially play in strengthening police accountability and in compensating,

denouncing, and deterring v iolations of Charter rights. He begins w ith an

exploration of how civil litigation has driven police reform in t he United

States and the bar riers preventing civ ilians from seeking similar redress

in Canada, and concludes by considering the two major police account-

ability certif‌ication motions that have been heard thus far in common

law Canada. The paper then discusse s the implications the se decisions

may have for the future use of cl ass actions to strengthen police account-

ability and defend Charte r rights.

ccar 11-2.indb 167 3/8/2016 2:27:20 PM