We use cookies to give you the best online experience. By using our website you agree to our use of cookies in accordance with our cookie policy. Learn more here.Close Me
The Québec Superior Court recently authorized a class
action against Shoppers Drug Mart and Pharmaprix (the
"Defendants") in connection with the "Pharmaprix
Optimum" customer loyalty program.
The program allowed members to earn points through purchases
made at participating stores, which could later be exchanged for
rebates.
On July 1, 2010, the Defendants unilaterally and without notice
changed the terms and conditions of the loyalty program by
decreasing the exchange value of points accumulated by members.
This also retroactively reduced the value of all points which had
been previously earned through the program. Option consommateurs
and the class representative, Pierre Guimond (the
"Plaintiffs") are demanding that the Defendants maintain
the previous exchange rate for all customers who became members of
the Optimum program before July 1, 2010, until the expiry of their
rights under their membership agreements in 2017. Although the
membership agreements contain a clause which specifically allows
the Defendants to make unilateral changes without notice, the
Plaintiffs argue that such clause is illegal and abusive, and
should thus be of no effect.
The court affirmed that the facts alleged by the Plaintiffs
disclosed a sufficient cause of action to warrant authorizing the
class action. It will now be up to the trial judge to determine
whether or not the Defendants' modifications constituted an
abuse of rights, and thus whether or not the previous exchange rate
must be reinstated.
We strongly encourage companies offering loyalty programs to
watch this case closely as the court's finding will likely have
an impact on loyalty programs offered in Québec, the wording
of program terms and conditions and any changes made to such terms
and conditions.
The content of this article is intended to provide a general
guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought
about your specific circumstances.
To print this article, all you need is to be registered on Mondaq.com.
Click to Login as an existing user or Register so you can print this article.
The Alberta Court of Queen’s Bench released a concerning decision on May 16th in Telecommunications Workers Union v Telus Communications Inc., 2013 ABQB 298.
In a recent decision, the Divisional Court of Ontario further confirmed the approach to, and difficulty with, "misclassification" overtime class-actions.
This case asked the Court to consider the unusual situation of a party to a potentially valid polygamous marriage (performed in Pakistan) asking for a divorce from her husband. Initially, the Court of Queen’s Bench declined to hear evidence from either party on the basis that Ms. Azam had admitted in her pleadings that Mr. Jan was married at the time of their marriage in Pakistan, and thus the marriage was void.
Top 5 Civil Appeals From The Court Of Appeal (April 2013) – Video Companion
