Canadian Appeals Monitor Information and Commentary on Upcoming and Recent Appeal Court Decisions

Tag Archives: Saskatchewan Court of Appeal

The Bright Line Rule: The SCC Reconsiders Its Approach to Conflicts of Interest

Posted in Case Comments, Professions

In a recent decision, Canadian National Railway Co. v. McKercher LLP, 2013 SCC 39, the Supreme Court of Canada revisited the “bright line” rule that applies to conflicts of interest among current clients. This rule, which was first articulated in R. v. Neil, [2002] 3 S.C.R. 631, provides that:

“… a lawyer may not represent one client whose interests are directly adverse to the immediate interests of another current client — even if the two mandates are unrelated — unless both clients consent after receiving full disclosure (and preferably independent legal advice), and the lawyer reasonably

Continue Reading

The Second Opinion: Class Actions, Constitutional Questions and Determining the “Preferable Proceeding”

A Commentary on Recent Legal Developments by the Opinions Group of McCarthy Tétrault LLP

Posted in Features, The Second Opinion

In Precision Contractors Ltd v Government of Saskatchewan, 2013 SKCA 57, the Court of Appeal found that a common issue of constitutional validity did not, in and of itself, make a class action not the “preferable proceeding”.

The Court of Appeal held that there was no absolute rule that a class action was perforce ill-suited to a claim for a declaration that a provincial taxing enactment was unconstitutional. In addition, the Court of Appeal noted the certification judge’s next step, bifurcating the proceedings by conditionally adjourning the certification application pending the determination of the constitutional issue in a … Continue Reading

Saskatchewan Court of Appeal Rejects Ragoonanan Principle

Posted in Case Comments, Class Actions

In a recent decision with potentially far-reaching consequences – Red Seal – the Saskatchewan Court of Appeal has rejected the so-called “Ragoonanan” principle applicable to class actions. The Ragoonanan principle, which derives from an Ontario case of the same name, requires that for each defendant named in a putative class action, there must be at least one representative plaintiff with a cause of action against it.


The decision in Red Seal was released alongside two other judgments in the same putative class action: Alves and Roussy.  The action involved allegations that the defendant tour companies sold

Continue Reading