Schick v. Boehringer Ingelheim (Canada) Ltd., [2011] O.T.C. Uned. 1942 (SC)
| Jurisdiction | Ontario |
| Judge | Strathy, J. |
| Court | Superior Court of Justice of Ontario (Canada) |
| Subject Matter | PRACTICE |
| Citation | [2011] O.T.C. Uned. 1942 (SC),[2011] O.T.C. Uned. 1942,2011 ONSC 1942 |
| Date | 28 March 2011 |
-
- This document is available in original version only for vLex customers
View this document and try vLex for 7 days - TRY VLEX
- This document is available in original version only for vLex customers
32 practice notes
-
A Real and Substantial Look at Jurisdiction in the Civil and Class Action Settings
...treat Parkinson’s disease caused compulsive behaviours including hyper-sexuality and gambling). Note also Schick v Boehringer Ingelheim, 2011 ONSC 1942 which alleged similar facts to Banerjee, but where certification was denied because a “behavioural monitoring regime” and not a medical mon......
-
Reconciling Limitation Period Principles with the Purposes and Complexity of Ontario Class Proceedings
...treat Parkinson’s disease caused compulsive behaviours including hyper-sexuality and gambling). Note also Schick v Boehringer Ingelheim, 2011 ONSC 1942 which alleged similar facts to Banerjee, but where certification was denied because a “behavioural monitoring regime” and not a medical mon......
-
The Fiction of Representative Plaintiff Liability: An Examination of Fee Shifting and Liability for Costs Within the Ontario Class Action Regime
...treat Parkinson’s disease caused compulsive behaviours including hyper-sexuality and gambling). Note also Schick v Boehringer Ingelheim, 2011 ONSC 1942 which alleged similar facts to Banerjee, but where certification was denied because a “behavioural monitoring regime” and not a medical mon......
-
Class Action Trends in Quebec and What They Mean for Your Business
...dataset note such compromises explicitly,12 and it is quite likely that a large number of 11 Schick v Boehringer Ingelheim (Canada) Ltd, 2011 ONSC 1942 at para 41 [Schick]: “The common issues set out in the factum of counsel for the plaintiff are listed in Schedule A to these reasons. As is......
Request a trial to view additional results
10 cases
-
Morel v. Koninklijke Philips N.V.,
...Pfizer Canada Inc., 2012 ONSC 3681; Miller v. Merck Frosst Canada Ltd., 2013 BCSC 544. [13] Schick v. Boehringer Ingelheim (Canada) Ltd., 2011 ONSC 1942. [14] Bartram v. GlaxoSmithKline Inc. 2012 BCSC 1804; Bartram (Guardian ad litem of) v. GlaxoSmithKline Inc., 2013 BCCA [15] Dembrowski v.......
-
Morel v. Koninklijke Philips N.V.,,
...Pfizer Canada Inc., 2012 ONSC 3681; Miller v. Merck Frosst Canada Ltd., 2013 BCSC 544. [13] Schick v. Boehringer Ingelheim (Canada) Ltd., 2011 ONSC 1942. [14] Bartram v. GlaxoSmithKline Inc. 2012 BCSC 1804; Bartram (Guardian ad litem of) v. GlaxoSmithKline Inc., 2013 BCCA [15] Dembrowski v.......
-
Cannon v. Funds for Canada Foundation,
...bifurcated to proceed after a common issues trial. I followed that course of action in Schick v. Boehringer Ingelheim (Canada) Ltd. , 2011 ONSC 1942 , [2011] O.J. No. 1381, adopting the decision of the Divisional Court in Robinson v. Medtronic , 2010 ONSC 3777, [2010] O.J. No. 3056. In Robi......
-
2023 BCSC 625,
...Pfizer Canada Inc., 2012 ONSC 3681; Miller v. Merck Frosst Canada Ltd., 2013 BCSC 544. 13 Schick v. Boehringer Ingelheim (Canada) Ltd., 2011 ONSC 1942. 14 Bartram v. GlaxoSmithKline Inc. 2012 BCSC 1804; Bartram (Guardian ad litem of) v. GlaxoSmithKline Inc., 2013 BCCA 15 Dembrowski v. Bayer......
Request a trial to view additional results
3 firm's commentaries
-
The Sensor: Autonomous And Connected Vehicles 'Ideal' For A Class Action?
...2018), online: Law 360. Williams v Canon Canada Inc., 2011 ONSC 6571 at para 125 [Williams]; Schick v Boehringer Ingelheim (Canada) Ltd., 2011 ONSC 1942 at para Thorpe v Honda Canada Inc., 2011 SKQB 72 [Thorpe]; Reid v Ford Motor Company, 2003 BCSC 1632; Kalra v Mercedes Benz, 2017 ONSC 379......
-
Class Action Settlement: Are You Protected From Future Claims In Overlapping Class Actions?
...In 2011, a class proceeding concerning the drug "Mirapex" was certified in Ontario: Schick v. Boehringer Ingelheim (Canada) Ltd., 2011 ONSC 1942. The class in Schick was all persons resident in Canada (excluding Quebec) who were prescribed and ingested "Mirapex (generic name: Pramipexole di......
-
Class Action Settlement: Are You Protected From Future Claims In Overlapping Class Actions?
...In 2011, a class proceeding concerning the drug "Mirapex" was certified in Ontario: Schick v. Boehringer Ingelheim (Canada) Ltd., 2011 ONSC 1942. The class in Schick was all persons resident in Canada (excluding Quebec) who were prescribed and ingested "Mirapex (generic name: Pramipexole di......
19 books & journal articles
-
A Real and Substantial Look at Jurisdiction in the Civil and Class Action Settings
...treat Parkinson’s disease caused compulsive behaviours including hyper-sexuality and gambling). Note also Schick v Boehringer Ingelheim, 2011 ONSC 1942 which alleged similar facts to Banerjee, but where certification was denied because a “behavioural monitoring regime” and not a medical mon......
-
Reconciling Limitation Period Principles with the Purposes and Complexity of Ontario Class Proceedings
...treat Parkinson’s disease caused compulsive behaviours including hyper-sexuality and gambling). Note also Schick v Boehringer Ingelheim, 2011 ONSC 1942 which alleged similar facts to Banerjee, but where certification was denied because a “behavioural monitoring regime” and not a medical mon......
-
The Fiction of Representative Plaintiff Liability: An Examination of Fee Shifting and Liability for Costs Within the Ontario Class Action Regime
...treat Parkinson’s disease caused compulsive behaviours including hyper-sexuality and gambling). Note also Schick v Boehringer Ingelheim, 2011 ONSC 1942 which alleged similar facts to Banerjee, but where certification was denied because a “behavioural monitoring regime” and not a medical mon......
-
Class Action Trends in Quebec and What They Mean for Your Business
...dataset note such compromises explicitly,12 and it is quite likely that a large number of 11 Schick v Boehringer Ingelheim (Canada) Ltd, 2011 ONSC 1942 at para 41 [Schick]: “The common issues set out in the factum of counsel for the plaintiff are listed in Schedule A to these reasons. As is......
Request a trial to view additional results