Canada: The Danier Leather Class Action Case

Last Updated: December 14 2011
Article by Jasmine T. Akbarali

Originally published in, October 24, 2007

After nine years of litigation, the Danier Leather Inc. class action suit was finally settled Oct. 12 when the Supreme Court of Canada ruled that the company had not violated securities disclosure laws.

Investor Rick Durst had challenged the information contained in Danier's prospectus. And not only did he lose the class action case, but he was also ordered to pay Danier's share of legal costs, a figure estimated to be in excess of $1-million.

The ramifications of the case are considerable. Join at noon EDT today for a discussion with Jasmine T. Akbarali, a lawyer with Lerners LLP who specializes in commercial litigation.

Ms. Akbarali was a member of the Lerners team representing the investors in the Danier case. This prospectus misrepresentation case was the first trial of a class action relating to the civil liability of corporate issuers and their directors for misrepresentation in a prospectus.

Related Articles Recent

Ms. Akbarali has summarized the case issues for

1. The scope of liability for prospectus misrepresentation.

Section 130 of the Securities Act (Ontario) provides for liability on the part of issuers and others (including directors) where a prospectus contains a misrepresentation. One of the issues in Danier was the scope of that provision. The Supreme Court of Canada concluded that under s. 130, an issuer can be liable for a misstatement of material fact up to the date the prospectus is receipted, but only for failure to disclose a material change between receipt and closing. A material fact is a fact that can be expected to affect the market price of a security. A material change is a change in relation to the business, operations or capital of an issuer. By concluding that post-receipt, only material changes must be disclosed, the court has relieved the issuer of an ongoing responsibility to disclose material facts to avoid civil liability. This makes the due diligence process for issuers and underwriters much cleaner and more predictable. It also means that investors cannot be sure they have all material facts when they purchase securities under a prospectus.

2. The applicability of the business judgment rule

The Supreme Court considered whether the business judgment rule could be used to assess management's regulatory disclosure obligations. Traditionally, the business judgment rule has been applied where a board of directors has before it a range of business options, and its choice is being criticized after the fact. This may arise where, for example, a shareholder is unhappy with a corporate decision taken by the board (say, which of competing takeover bid offers to recommend) and seeks an oppression remedy. Courts have acknowledged that they do not have the expertise of business managers. Recognizing the policy that directors and management should feel free to take appropriate risks and make decisions in the best interests of the shareholders given their expertise, courts have applied the business judgment rule to decline to second guess those decisions as long as they are within a range of reasonableness. The question in Danier was whether to extend that rule to the securities context, where the issue was whether the issuer had complied with its obligations under the Securities Act. The Supreme Court of Canada found that the rationale behind the business judgment rule does not apply, as management has no advantage over courts when it comes to assessing the quality of disclosure.This finding strengthens investor protections under the Securities Act, because it recognizes that it is inappropriate to defer to management's assessment of whether it has met its regulatory obligations.

3. Costs in class actions

The Court considered whether to depart from the traditional rule that the unsuccessful party bears the successful party's costs. The Class Proceedings Act, in s. 31, allows a court to decline to award costs against a representative plaintiff, recognizing the unique access to justice issues that are engaged in a class action. The court declined to apply s. 31 in this case, and by doing so, may have "chilled" class actions. Representative plaintiffs may be less inclined to step up in view of the repercussions they might face if they are unsuccessful. These repercussions are greatest where the suit has merit but is eventually unsuccessful, because those are the cases where the costs awards will also be highest.

Ms. Akbarali acts on a broad range of civil litigation matters, encompassing both trial and appellate advocacy.

Ms. Akbarali's experience includes class action proceedings, product liability claims, investment dealer negligence, securities litigation, shareholder disputes, oppression remedy claims, contractual disputes and constitutional litigation. She has appeared in the Ontario Superior Court of Justice, the Divisional Court, the Court of Appeal for Ontario and the Supreme Court of Canada.

Ms. Akbarali received her Bachelor of Laws from the University of Windsor where she was the gold medallist of her law class. She received her Bachelor of Arts degree from McMaster University and her Suomi (Finnish) I & II Certificate from the University of Helsinki. Ms. Akbarali served as Clerk to the Honourable Mr. Justice J. C. Major, Puisne Justice of the Supreme Court of Canada.

Ms. Akbarali is a member of the Advocates' Society, the Toronto Lawyers' Association, the Ontario Bar Association and the Canadian Bar Association. She is a director of the George Hull Centre for Children and Families and volunteers with the Children's Bridge Foundation.

Join the conversation at noon EDT today, or get a jump on the queue by submitting your question here.

Editor's Note: editors will read and allow or reject each question/comment. Comments/questions may be edited for length or clarity. We will not publish questions/comments that include personal attacks on participants in these discussions, that make false or unsubstantiated allegations, that purport to quote people or reports where the purported quote or fact cannot be easily verified, or questions/comments that include vulgar language or libellous statements. Preference will be given to readers who submit questions/comments using their full name and home town, rather than a pseudonym.

Cathryn Motherwell, deputy editor, Report on Business: Hello Jasmine, and welcome to We are delighted to have you join us today for a discussion that has certainly been the talk in legal circles, and in the investment community. And so to start, could you please summarize what you believe are the key points where the Supreme Court of Canada is breaking new ground?

Jasmine Akbarali: I'm happy to be here.

The Danier action involved Danier's initial public offering, which closed on May 20, 1998. The crux of the plaintiffs' complaint was that, after the prospectus was receipted on May 6, 1998, but before closing, Danier became aware of poor sales results but did not disclose them. The allegation was that the results made statements in its prospectus misleading and constituted a misrepresentation under s. 130 of the Ontario Securities Act. This would make Danier liable for damages to the class under the Act if proved. When the poor sales results were disclosed, two weeks after closing, Danier's share price fell. The trial judge found that investors lost approximately 22% of their investment. In the end, Danier substantially met its forecast, but even when those results were released, the share price did not recover.

The first issue the Supreme Court grappled with was the reach of s. 130, and specifically, whether the provision provided for liability for failing to disclose a material fact that arose after the prospectus was receipted but before closing. The Act defines material facts as those which can reasonably be expected to affect the price of the security. The material fact that was alleged not to be disclosed was the poor sales results.

However, under the scheme of the Securities Act, an issuer is obliged to disclose material facts up to the date of receipt, but only material changes thereafter. Material changes are changes in the business, operations or capital of an issuer. The Court had to consider whether the disclosure regime in the Act set the parameters for the civil liability created under s. 130 of the Act. In its conclusion, the Court found that there could not be civil liability under s. 130 for failing to disclose material facts after receipt. Since Danier had complied with its disclosure obligations (ie because the poor sales results did not amount to a material change), it had no liability for misrepresentation under s. 130.

The court also addressed how the business judgment rule applies in the securities context. The business judgment rule traditionally has application to corporate decision making, and is a judicial recognition that courts do not have the expertise of business people. However, extending the business judgment rule to the determination of whether adequate disclosure is made under the Securities Act was a novel application of the rule. The court concluded that the business judgment rule should not apply to disclosure decisions, since evaluating the quality of disclosure is appropriately for the courts and the legislature.

Last, the court was asked to depart from the traditional costs rules in civil litigation, in which the losing party pays part of the successful party's costs. The Class Proceedings Act allows the court to exercise its discretion and not award costs against an unsuccessful representative plaintiff. The court declined to depart from the traditional rule in this case, making the representative plaintiff liable for significant costs. This can be expected to have a chilling effect on class actions, since plaintiffs risk becoming responsible for costs that may be much greater than their personal financial stake in the litigation.

Evgeny Zborovsky writes: The Supreme Court found that Danier's forecast contained an implied representation of objective reasonableness as of the date the final prospectus was receipted, overturning both the Ontario Court of Appeal on the issue of objective reasonableness and the trial judge on the date issue. What do you think will be the impact of this aspect of the decision?

Jasmine Akbarali: That is an interesting point Evgeny. For those who are unfamiliar with this issue, I will add a little background.

The plaintiffs alleged that Danier's forecast of its fourth quarter and fiscal year 1998 included the implied representation that it was objectively reasonable and that this representation ceased to be true after May 6, but before closing, when Danier became aware of its poor sales results. One issue that was canvassed at the Court of Appel and the Supreme Court of Canada was whether the implied representation of objective reasonableness was one of fact or law.

The Court of Appeal concluded that there was no such implied representation either at law or in fact. Danier's prospectus called its forecast "management's best judgment". By the Court of Appeal's reasoning, that did not imply that management's best judgment was also objectively reasonable. The Supreme Court disagreed, concluding that, as a matter of fact, "management's best judgment" would be understood to be objectively reasonable.

This was bolstered by other statements in the prospectus, such as the auditor's statement that management's assumptions provided a reasonable basis for the forecast. However, the court also limited the impact of the representation to May 6, the date of receipt, finding that the forecast was a snapshot of the company's prospects at that time.

Because the findings are factual, the impact is circumscribed. However, what is important about the Supreme Court's approach is that it interpreted the language of the prospectus in the way that an investor would. Although there was no express representation of objective reasonableness, the court looked at how an investor would read and understand the prospectus. Issuers will be responsible for the messages they convey, whether explicitly or not.

Cathryn Motherwell: A number of big investors and funds have said the deck is stacked against them in Canadian courts. Does the Danier decision reinforce that perception?

Jasmine Akbarali: The Danier decision is a limit on issuer liability. By adopting an approach to s. 130 that does not require an issuer to correct statements in a prospectus that become untrue, if they are not material changes, the Supreme Court has limited recourse for investors in some circumstances. There are entities that will only invest in cross-listed securities, in part because they want access to the broader remedies available in the United States. Whether in the long run this will impact the ability of smaller issuers to raise capital in Canadian markets remains to be seen.

Cathryn Motherwell: The Danier lawsuit was launched before Bill 198 took effect in Ontario. If that bill had been in effect could there had been a different decision?

Jasmine Akbarali: I don't think so. Bill 198 is important for secondary market liability, which has different issues than liability for prospectus offerings. (A big concern about secondary market liability is indeterminate liability, since shares may change hands a number of times. That concern is not engaged in the primary market, where the purchasers under a prospectus are easily identifiable.)

Section 130 remains much as it was back in 1998 when Danier's IPO closed. The Supreme Court of Canada noted the amendments to the section and that they were not material to the issues raised in this case.

Cathryn Motherwell: Are you surprised that your client has been ordered to pay costs for both sides? Will that send a chill to other investors?

Jasmine Akbarali: This aspect of the Supreme Court's decision probably has the broadest effect on class actions generally, not just securities class actions.

The plaintiff had asked the court to decline to award costs by exercising its jurisdiction under s. 31 of the Class Proceedings Act. That section allows a court, considering whether the class action was a test case, raised a novel point of law or involved a matter of public interest, to decline to award costs against an unsuccessful representative plaintiff. This is because class actions generally engage access to justice issues. They are a vehicle to allow a number of claims, which individually might not justify litigation, to be brought to the court together. The representative plaintiff in a class action takes on a responsibility for the benefit of the class. On his or her own, the representative plaintiff may not have a sufficient financial stake in the litigation to proceed.

It is also important to remember that class actions involve additional steps not found in individual litigation, such as the motion to certify the action as a class proceeding. As a result, costs of class actions can be higher than individual actions. They will be even higher if the action is meritorious, but eventually unsuccessful, because one can expect more pre-trial motions and longer proceedings in those cases.

In this case, the court ordered the representative plaintiff to pay the defendants' costs, which will be significant. This decision is likely to produce a chilling effect on other class actions, because representative plaintiffs stand to lose significantly more than their potential gain.

However, it is also important to note that class actions generally are funded on a contingency basis. In other words, most plaintiffs' counsel will not be paid unless the class action is successful or settles. The costs exposure of a representative plaintiff is generally to the defence, not his or her own lawyers.

Another interesting aspect of this issue is how plaintiff class action lawyers will decide how to take on cases. There are some counsel who will indemnify representative plaintiffs against adverse costs awards. I think we will see counsel less willing to do that going forward. I think we will also see counsel less likely to take on difficult cases that perhaps should be brought to courts because of the concerns of costs exposure after this decision.

Richard Ballantyne from Vancouver writes: As a director, I find the decision heartening, but as an investor, it does seem to be a return to the Wild West where companies can duck duties to prospective investors. The part I am struggling with is that I find it hard to distiguish between the definition of material fact and material change. I would have thought that a drop in sales was a material change to operations. How did the court pin-point the distinction.

Jasmine Akbarali: That's a great question Richard. The court noted the distinction between a change in results of operations and a change in operations. The latter is clearly a material change, but the former is not. The court emphasized that poor intra-quarterly results may reflect a material change in operations, but on its own is not a change in the business, operations or capital of an issuer.

From a policy perspective, one reason why material facts are subject to lower disclosure thresholds than material changes is because material facts may be matters external to the issuer. There has been a reluctance to burden an issuer with the obligation to monitor and disclose facts external to it even if those facts could impact its share price.

Cathryn Motherwell: Thanks very much for shedding some much-needed light on this critical issue. Are there any points you would like to raise in summation?

Jasmine Akbarali: It's been a pleasure to be here.

I think the Danier decision has clarified the disclosure obligations of reporting issuers and let investors know what kind of protection they can expect from s. 130. The court, in its reasons, recognized that the Securities Act is remedial legislation, deserving of a broad interpretation. The Act works to protect investors from the risks of an unregulated market. It also works for issuers, by promoting the integrity and efficiency of the capital markets so as to enhance the pool of capital available to them. The Danier decision, at its heart, is about the balance between the interests of investors and the obligations of issuers.

To print this article, all you need is to be registered on

Click to Login as an existing user or Register so you can print this article.

Jasmine T. Akbarali
In association with
Related Video
Up-coming Events Search
Font Size:
Mondaq on Twitter
Register for Access and our Free Biweekly Alert for
This service is completely free. Access 250,000 archived articles from 100+ countries and get a personalised email twice a week covering developments (and yes, our lawyers like to think you’ve read our Disclaimer).
Email Address
Company Name
Confirm Password
Mondaq Topics -- Select your Interests
 Law Performance
 Law Practice
 Media & IT
 Real Estate
 Wealth Mgt
Asia Pacific
European Union
Latin America
Middle East
United States
Worldwide Updates
Check to state you have read and
agree to our Terms and Conditions

Terms & Conditions and Privacy Statement (the Website) is owned and managed by Mondaq Ltd and as a user you are granted a non-exclusive, revocable license to access the Website under its terms and conditions of use. Your use of the Website constitutes your agreement to the following terms and conditions of use. Mondaq Ltd may terminate your use of the Website if you are in breach of these terms and conditions or if Mondaq Ltd decides to terminate your license of use for whatever reason.

Use of

You may use the Website but are required to register as a user if you wish to read the full text of the content and articles available (the Content). You may not modify, publish, transmit, transfer or sell, reproduce, create derivative works from, distribute, perform, link, display, or in any way exploit any of the Content, in whole or in part, except as expressly permitted in these terms & conditions or with the prior written consent of Mondaq Ltd. You may not use electronic or other means to extract details or information about’s content, users or contributors in order to offer them any services or products which compete directly or indirectly with Mondaq Ltd’s services and products.


Mondaq Ltd and/or its respective suppliers make no representations about the suitability of the information contained in the documents and related graphics published on this server for any purpose. All such documents and related graphics are provided "as is" without warranty of any kind. Mondaq Ltd and/or its respective suppliers hereby disclaim all warranties and conditions with regard to this information, including all implied warranties and conditions of merchantability, fitness for a particular purpose, title and non-infringement. In no event shall Mondaq Ltd and/or its respective suppliers be liable for any special, indirect or consequential damages or any damages whatsoever resulting from loss of use, data or profits, whether in an action of contract, negligence or other tortious action, arising out of or in connection with the use or performance of information available from this server.

The documents and related graphics published on this server could include technical inaccuracies or typographical errors. Changes are periodically added to the information herein. Mondaq Ltd and/or its respective suppliers may make improvements and/or changes in the product(s) and/or the program(s) described herein at any time.


Mondaq Ltd requires you to register and provide information that personally identifies you, including what sort of information you are interested in, for three primary purposes:

  • To allow you to personalize the Mondaq websites you are visiting.
  • To enable features such as password reminder, newsletter alerts, email a colleague, and linking from Mondaq (and its affiliate sites) to your website.
  • To produce demographic feedback for our information providers who provide information free for your use.

Mondaq (and its affiliate sites) do not sell or provide your details to third parties other than information providers. The reason we provide our information providers with this information is so that they can measure the response their articles are receiving and provide you with information about their products and services.

If you do not want us to provide your name and email address you may opt out by clicking here .

If you do not wish to receive any future announcements of products and services offered by Mondaq by clicking here .

Information Collection and Use

We require site users to register with Mondaq (and its affiliate sites) to view the free information on the site. We also collect information from our users at several different points on the websites: this is so that we can customise the sites according to individual usage, provide 'session-aware' functionality, and ensure that content is acquired and developed appropriately. This gives us an overall picture of our user profiles, which in turn shows to our Editorial Contributors the type of person they are reaching by posting articles on Mondaq (and its affiliate sites) – meaning more free content for registered users.

We are only able to provide the material on the Mondaq (and its affiliate sites) site free to site visitors because we can pass on information about the pages that users are viewing and the personal information users provide to us (e.g. email addresses) to reputable contributing firms such as law firms who author those pages. We do not sell or rent information to anyone else other than the authors of those pages, who may change from time to time. Should you wish us not to disclose your details to any of these parties, please tick the box above or tick the box marked "Opt out of Registration Information Disclosure" on the Your Profile page. We and our author organisations may only contact you via email or other means if you allow us to do so. Users can opt out of contact when they register on the site, or send an email to with “no disclosure” in the subject heading

Mondaq News Alerts

In order to receive Mondaq News Alerts, users have to complete a separate registration form. This is a personalised service where users choose regions and topics of interest and we send it only to those users who have requested it. Users can stop receiving these Alerts by going to the Mondaq News Alerts page and deselecting all interest areas. In the same way users can amend their personal preferences to add or remove subject areas.


A cookie is a small text file written to a user’s hard drive that contains an identifying user number. The cookies do not contain any personal information about users. We use the cookie so users do not have to log in every time they use the service and the cookie will automatically expire if you do not visit the Mondaq website (or its affiliate sites) for 12 months. We also use the cookie to personalise a user's experience of the site (for example to show information specific to a user's region). As the Mondaq sites are fully personalised and cookies are essential to its core technology the site will function unpredictably with browsers that do not support cookies - or where cookies are disabled (in these circumstances we advise you to attempt to locate the information you require elsewhere on the web). However if you are concerned about the presence of a Mondaq cookie on your machine you can also choose to expire the cookie immediately (remove it) by selecting the 'Log Off' menu option as the last thing you do when you use the site.

Some of our business partners may use cookies on our site (for example, advertisers). However, we have no access to or control over these cookies and we are not aware of any at present that do so.

Log Files

We use IP addresses to analyse trends, administer the site, track movement, and gather broad demographic information for aggregate use. IP addresses are not linked to personally identifiable information.


This web site contains links to other sites. Please be aware that Mondaq (or its affiliate sites) are not responsible for the privacy practices of such other sites. We encourage our users to be aware when they leave our site and to read the privacy statements of these third party sites. This privacy statement applies solely to information collected by this Web site.

Surveys & Contests

From time-to-time our site requests information from users via surveys or contests. Participation in these surveys or contests is completely voluntary and the user therefore has a choice whether or not to disclose any information requested. Information requested may include contact information (such as name and delivery address), and demographic information (such as postcode, age level). Contact information will be used to notify the winners and award prizes. Survey information will be used for purposes of monitoring or improving the functionality of the site.


If a user elects to use our referral service for informing a friend about our site, we ask them for the friend’s name and email address. Mondaq stores this information and may contact the friend to invite them to register with Mondaq, but they will not be contacted more than once. The friend may contact Mondaq to request the removal of this information from our database.


This website takes every reasonable precaution to protect our users’ information. When users submit sensitive information via the website, your information is protected using firewalls and other security technology. If you have any questions about the security at our website, you can send an email to

Correcting/Updating Personal Information

If a user’s personally identifiable information changes (such as postcode), or if a user no longer desires our service, we will endeavour to provide a way to correct, update or remove that user’s personal data provided to us. This can usually be done at the “Your Profile” page or by sending an email to

Notification of Changes

If we decide to change our Terms & Conditions or Privacy Policy, we will post those changes on our site so our users are always aware of what information we collect, how we use it, and under what circumstances, if any, we disclose it. If at any point we decide to use personally identifiable information in a manner different from that stated at the time it was collected, we will notify users by way of an email. Users will have a choice as to whether or not we use their information in this different manner. We will use information in accordance with the privacy policy under which the information was collected.

How to contact Mondaq

You can contact us with comments or queries at

If for some reason you believe Mondaq Ltd. has not adhered to these principles, please notify us by e-mail at and we will use commercially reasonable efforts to determine and correct the problem promptly.