Wilson v. Servier Canada Inc. et al., [2000] O.T.C. 884 (SupCt)

• Judge: Cumming, J.
• Court: Superior Court of Justice of Ontario (Canada)
• Case Date: July 31, 2000
• Jurisdiction: Ontario
• Citations: [2000] O.T.C. 884 (SupCt)

Wilson v. Servier Can. Inc., [2000] O.T.C. 884 (SupCt)

MLB headnote and full text

Temp. Cite: [2000] O.T.C. TBEd. SE.063

Sheila Wilson (plaintiff) v. Servier Canada Inc. and Biofarma S.A. (defendants)

(Court File No. 98-CV-158832)

Indexed As: Wilson v. Servier Canada Inc. et al.

Court of Ontario

Superior Court of Justice

Cumming, J.

September 13 and October 5, 2000.

Summary:

The plaintiff Wilson was prescribed Ponderal (fenfluramine), a weight loss drug, in 1995. The defendant Servier Canada, a Canadian corporation, was the distributor of Ponderal and Redux, a similar drug, in Canada. The defendant Biofarma S.A., a French corporation, was the parent company of Servier. Wilson was diagnosed as having primary pulmonary hypertension (PPH) in 1998. Wilson brought an action against Servier and Biofarma S.A. alleging that Ponderal and Redux were unsafe for human consumption and caused life threatening diseases, including PPH. 1,407,000 prescriptions for Ponderal were filled in Canada before it was withdrawn from the Canadian market in 1997. Wilson brought a motion to have the action certified as a class action. Several thousand persons across Canada were estimated to be potential class members. Biofarma brought motions seeking a stay of the action against it, arguing that Ontario was forum non conveniens and that Article 15 of the French Code Civil would make any judgment obtained against it in Ontario unenforceable in France.

The Ontario Superior Court certified the action as a class action. Biofarma's motion to stay or dismiss the proceedings on the basis of forum non conveniens was dismissed. See paragraphs 1 to 150. In further reasons, the court allowed the defendants' motion to stay the certification order pending the determination of an application for leave to appeal to the Ontario Divisional Court. See paragraphs 151 to 165.

Conflict of Laws - Topic 1664

Actions - General - Forum conveniens - Considerations - See paragraphs 19 to 37.

Conflict of Laws - Topic 7601

Torts - Jurisdiction - Forum conveniens - See paragraphs 19 to 37.

Practice - Topic 209

Persons who can sue and be sued - Individuals and corporations - Status or standing -Class or representative actions - General principles - See paragraphs 99 to 126, 137 to 140.

Practice - Topic 209.1

Persons who can sue and be sued - Individuals and corporations - Status or standing -Class actions - Members of class - General - See paragraphs 46 to 107.

Practice - Topic 209.3

Persons who can sue and be sued - Individuals and corporations - Status or standing -Class actions - Certification - Considerations (incl. when class action appropriate) - See paragraphs 46 to 126, 137 to 140.

Practice - Topic 209.4

Persons who can sue and be sued - Individuals and corporations - Status or standing -Class actions - Certification - Appointment of representative plaintiff - See paragraphs 137 to 140.

Practice - Topic 209.8

Persons who can sue and be sued - Individuals and corporations - Status or standing -Class actions - Notice to members of class - See paragraphs 142 to 150.

Practice - Topic 216

Persons who can sue and be sued - Individuals and corporations - Status or standing -Persons living out of court's jurisdiction - See paragraphs 46 to 126.

Cases Noticed:

Jeffers et al. v. American Home Products Corp., 1999 U.S. Dist. Lexis 13228 (Pa.), refd to. [para. 9].

Canadian Westinghouse Co. v. Davey and United Engineering Co., [1964] 2 O.R. 282 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 13].

Ecolab Ltd. v. Greenspace Services Ltd. et al. (1998), 107 O.A.C. 199; 38 O.R.(3d) 145 (Div. Ct.), refd to. [para. 13].

Furlan et al. v. Shell Oil Co. et al. (1999), 21 B.C.T.C. 30; [1999] 11 W.W.R. 261 (S.C.), affd. (2000), 140 B.C.A.C. 235; 229 W.A.C. 235 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 14].

Charmasson v. Charmasson (1981), 34 O.R.(2d) 498 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 17].

ABB Power Generation Inc. v. CSX Transportation (1996), 47 C.P.C.(3d) 381 (Ont. Gen. Div.), refd to. [para. 18].

Frymer v. Brettschneider (1994), 72 O.A.C. 360; 19 O.R.(3d) 60 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 19].

Aluminium Co. of Canada v. Toronto, [1944] 3 D.L.R. 609 (S.C.C.), refd to. [para. 22].

Tridont Leasing (Canada) Ltd. v. Saskatoon Market Mall Ltd. (1995), 131 Sask.R. 169; 95 W.A.C. 169; 24 B.L.R.(2d) 105 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 22].

Smith, Stone and Knight Ltd. v. Lord Mayer, Alderman and Citizens of Birmingham Corp., [1939] 4 All E.R. 116 (K.B.), refd to. [para. 22].

Kosmopoulos et al. v. Constitution Insurance Co. of Canada et al., [1987] 1 S.C.R. 2; 74 N.R. 360; 21 O.A.C. 4, refd to. [para. 22].

Shibamoto & Co. et al. v. Western Fish Producers Inc. (Bankrupt) et al., [1991] 3 F.C. 214; 43 F.T.R. 1 (T.D.), affd. (1992), 145 N.R. 91 (F.C.A.), refd to. [para. 22].

Morguard Investments Ltd. et al. v. De Savoye, [1990] 3 S.C.R. 1077; 122 N.R. 81; 76 D.L.R.(4th) 256, refd to. [para. 28].

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, refd to. [para. 28].

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

Societe Nationale Industrielle Aerospatiale et al. v. United States District Court for Southern District of Iowa (1987), 482 U.S. 522, refd to. [para. 31].

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. 33].

Connelly v. R.T.Z. Corp. plc et al., [1998] A.C. 854; [1997] 3 W.L.R. 373; [1997] 4 All E.R. 335; 218 N.R. 305 ( H.L.), refd to. [para. 33].

Lubbe v. Cape plc (2000), 259 N.R. 18 (H.L.), refd to. [para. 34].

Jannock Corp. v. Tamblyn (R.T.) & Partners Ltd. (1975), 8 O.R.(2d) 622; 58 D.L.R.(3d) 678 (C.A.), leave to appeal refused [1975] 1 S.C.R. xiii; 8 O.R.(2d) 622, refd to. [para. 35].

Zupancich v. Zupancich, [1998] O.T.C. Uned. 759 (Gen. Div.), refd to. [para. 39].

Dofasco Inc. et al. v. Ucar Carbon Canada Inc. et al. (1998), 79 O.T.C. 377 (Gen. Div.), refd to. [para. 41].

Hunt v. T & N plc et al., [1990] 2 S.C.R. 959; 117 N.R. 321, refd to. [para. 47].

Hunt v. Carey Canada Inc. - see Hunt v. T & N plc et al.

Anderson et al. v. Wilson et al. (1999), 122 O.A.C. 69; 44 O.R.(3d) 673 (C.A.), leave to appeal refused (2000), 258 N.R. 194 (S.C.C.), refd to. [para. 47].

Moran et al. v. Pyle National (Canada) Ltd., [1975] 1 S.C.R. 393; 1 N.R. 122; 43 D.L.R.(3d) 239, refd to. [para. 51].

Mouhteros v. DeVry Canada Inc. (1998), 70 O.T.C. 138; 41 O.R.(3d) 63 (Gen. Div.), refd to. [para. 56].

Upper Churchill Water Rights Reversion Act, 1980, Re; Churchill Falls (Labrador) Corp. et al. v. Newfoundland (Attorney General) et al., [1984] 1 S.C.R. 297; 53 N.R. 268; 47 Nfld. & P.E.I.R. 125; 139 A.P.R. 125, refd to. [para. 61].

Osborne, Millar and Barnhart et al. v. Canada (Treasury Board) et al., [1991] 2 S.C.R. 69; 125 N.R. 241, refd to. [para. 62].

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, refd to. [para. 68].

Bendall v. McGhan Medical Corp. (1993), 14 O.R.(3d) 734 (Gen. Div.), refd to. [para. 76].

Nantais v. Telectronics Proprietary (Canada) Ltd. (1995), 25 O.R.(3d) 331 (Gen. Div.), leave to appeal denied (1995), 40 C.P.C.(3d) 263; 129 D.L.R.(4th) 110 (Ont. Div. Ct.), revd. (1996), 7 C.P.C.(4th) 206 (Ont. C.A.), refd to. [para. 75].

Carom et al. v. Bre-X Minerals Ltd. et al. (1999), 99 O.T.C. 335; 43 O.R.(3d) 441 (Gen. Div.), refd to. [para. 75].

Webb v. K-Mart Canada Ltd. et al. (1999), 107 O.T.C. 373; 45 O.R.(3d) 389 (S.C.), refd to. [para. 75].

Harrington v. Dow Corning Corp. et al., [1997] B.C.T.C. Uned. 229; 29 B.C.L.R.(3d) 88; 8 C.P.C.(4th) 262 (S.C.), refd to. [para. 75].

Phillips Petroleum Co. v. Shutts et al. (1985), 105 S. Ct. 2965 (U.S. Sup. Ct.), refd to. [para. 78].

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, reving. (1992), 11 B.C.A.C. 94; 22 W.A.C. 94; 89 D.L.R.(4th) 129 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 92].

Femcare Ltd. v. Bright, [2000] F.C.A. 512 (Aust.), refd to. [para. 93].

Chace et al. v. Crane Canada Inc. (1997), 101 B.C.A.C. 32; 164 W.A.C. 32; 14 C.P.C.(4th) 197 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 102].

Bywater v. Toronto Transit Commission (1998), 83 O.T.C. 1; 27 C.P.C.(4th) 172, supplementary reasons (1999), 30 C.P.C.(4th) 131 (Gen. Div.), refd to. [paras. 117, 142].

Ontario New Home Warranty Program v. Chevron Chemical Co. (1989), 46 O.R.(3d) 130 (S.C.), refd to. [para. 118].

Abdool v. Anaheim Management Ltd. (1995), 78 O.A.C. 377; 21 O.R.(3d) 453 (Div. Ct.), refd to. [para. 125].

Dambrowsky v. Olson (1953), 8 W.W.R.(N.S.) 716 (Alta. C.A.), varying (1952), 6 W.W.R.(N.S.) 493 (Alta. S.C.), refd to. [para. 127].

Barnes v. American Tobacco Co. (1998), 161 F.3d 127 (Pa.), refd to. [para. 132].

Ayres v. Jackson Tp. (1987), 525 A.2d 287 (N.J.), refd to. [para. 132].

Metro-North Commuter Railroad Co. v. Buckley (1997), 521 U.S. 424 (Sup. Ct.), refd to. [para. 132].

Joncas et al. v. Spruce Falls Power and Paper Co. et al., [1999] O.J. No. 2359 (Gen. Div.), refd to. [para. 17].

R. v. Lavallee, [1990] 1 S.C.R. 852; 108 N.R. 321; 67 Man.R.(2d) 1; 55 C.C.C.(3d) 97; 76 C.R.(3d) 329; [1990] 4 W.W.R. 1, refd to. [para. 146].

Authors and Works Noticed:

Abenhaim, L., et al., Appetite Suppressant Drugs and the Risk of Pulmanary Hypertension, (1996), 335:9 N. Eng. J. Med. 609, generally [para. 48].

Alberta, Institute of Law Research and Reform, Class Actions (2000), Memorandum No. 9, p. 62 [para. 88].

Castel, J.-G., Canadian Conflict of Laws (4th Ed. 1997), p. 55 [para. 92].

Curfman, G., Editorial: Diet Pills Redux, (1997), 337:5 N. Eng. J. Med. 629, generally [para. 48].

Douglas, J.G., et al., Pulmonary Hypertension and Fenfluramine (1981), 283 British Med. J. 88, generally [para. 48].

Fleming, John G., The Law of Torts (9th Ed. 1998), p. 289 [para. 16].

Hick, H., et al., A Population-Based Study of Appetite Suppressant Drugs and the Risk of Cardiac-Valve Regurgitation (1998), 339:11 N. Eng. J. Med. 719, generally [para. 48].

Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation, Re: Diet Drugs (Phentermine, Fenfluramine, Dexfevfluramine) Products Liability Litigation (1998), F. Supp. 834, generally [para. 9].

Klar, L., Remedies in Tort (2000 Update), vol. 3, paras. 69, 76-79 [para. 129].

Manitoba Law Reform Commission, Class Proceedings (1999), Report No. 100, p. 31 [para. 87].

Walker, J., Interprovincial Sovereign Immunity Revisited (1997), 35 Osgoode Hall L.J. 379, p. 396 [para. 74].

Watson, G.D., and Au, F., Constitutional Limits on Service Ex Juris: Unanswered Questions from Morguard (2000), 23 Adv. Q. 167, pp. 177, 178 [para. 73].

Weissman, N.J., et al., An Assessment of Heart-Valve Abnormalities in Obese Patients Taking Dexfenfluramine, Sustained-Release Dexfenfluramine, or Placebo (1998), 339:11 N. Eng. J. Med. 725, generally [para. 131].

Counsel:

Joel Rochon and Vincent Genova, for the plaintiff;

William McNamara and Stephen Scholtz, for the defendants.

These motions were heard on May 30-31, July 12-14 and July 31, 2000, before Cumming, J., of the Ontario Superior Court, who delivered the following judgment on September 13 and October 5, 2000.

Please note: The following judgment has not been edited.