Canada: Sufficient Evidence Of Commonality In Multi-Product Medical Devices Class Actions – Cautionary Tales

Last Updated: September 9 2016
Article by Peter W. Kryworuk and Rebecca Case

In order to prove that a group of related medical devices have sufficient commonality to proceed as one class action, the plaintiff must present evidence that demonstrates 'some basis in fact' not only that there is commonality between the devices but also that there is commonality in the allegations, e.g. design defect or inadequate warning. Only where the plaintiff has not satisfied this burden will any evidence going to these issues presented by the defendant be considered and weighed.

This conclusion was recently articulated following a series of certification reasons in multi-product medical device class actions. Each of the three cases alleged commonality of the devices and commonality of the allegations regarding different yet related medical devices as their core concern on certification. Two actions were with respect to products containing transvaginal mesh and the other concerned hip implant devices.1

  • In O'Brien v Bard, 2015 ONSC 2470, the motion for certification was dismissed subject to the plaintiffs requesting a case conference to bring an 'alternatives motion'. Nineteen different products were in issue. The fact that each product contained surgical mesh was insufficient to demonstrate commonality. The plaintiff also did not present evidence that the proposed common element of mesh was, on its own, dangerous, or that there was commonality in product design decisions. The defence evidence was used by the case management judge to conclude that 19 separate design decisions were made - thereby negating commonality.2
  • In Vester v. Boston Scientific, 2015 ONSC 7950, there were nine products in issue. This time it was established that the same mesh was used in all devices. The defence evidence suggested that the use of the mesh was standard and the plaintiff did not provide evidence that the mesh was dangerous. The plaintiff also did not establish that there was commonality in an alleged design defect or inadequate warning. It was therefore possible that there was no design defect or up to nine design defects. Further specificity was required and the motion was adjourned.3
  • In Dine v Biomet, 2015 ONSC 7050, there were three devices in issue. These were all large-head metal-on-metal hip implants. Two of the three were total hip replacement systems and the third was a resurfacing technology. The plaintiff presented evidence that these devices had high revision rates, were associated with risky metal-related pathology and that the three devices were treated as one product group - including by the defendant. The defendant submitted expert opinions that refuted the revision rates and evidence of the plaintiff's experts. This action was certified.4 The defendants sought leave to appeal in part on the ground that there were conflicting decisions, referencing in particular O'Brien and Vester.5

In denying leave to appeal Justice Then reviewed the above three decisions and concluded that they were not conflicting. Justice Then found that even though there were different outcomes based on what was arguably similar evidence presented by the defendants, there were varying findings of the sufficiency of the plaintiffs' evidence that was before each Court.

In Dine the case management judge found that the plaintiffs had discharged their evidentiary burden of demonstrating some basis in fact of commonality. As a result, while the defendants disputed this, it was not appropriate to consider the defendants' evidence as certification is not the proper forum for adjudication on the merits.6 In contrast in both O'Brien and Vester, the case management judge found that the plaintiffs had not met their evidentiary burden of proving commonality.7

As per Justice Then, the above decisions are consistent amongst themselves and also consistent with the principles established by the Supreme Court in Hollick8 and, more recently, in Pro-Sys, Sun-Rype and AIC.9 In the context of commonality what is generally required is evidence that the common issue actually exists and that the issue can be answered in common.10  There is to be no weighing of the plaintiff's evidence against directly contradictory evidence from the defendant. However, weighing the plaintiff's evidence in its own right or weighing the plaintiff's evidence and considering and relying on the defendant's evidence to fill in gaps in the record to find that the plaintiffs have not met their evidentiary burden is permissible.11

Unlike O'Brien and Vester, in Dine, the case management judge found that the plaintiff had established a sufficient basis in fact for commonality. As a result, the defendant's evidence was aimed at contradicting the plaintiff's evidence and was not properly considered on certification.

In multi-product medical device class actions both plaintiffs and defendants would be wise to direct their energies towards analysing the sufficiency of the evidence on the common issues.

The content contained in these blogs is intended to provide information about the subject matter and is not intended as legal advice. If you would like further information or advice on any of the subjects discussed in a blog post, please contact the author.


1An earlier discussion of these cases, which we drew from for this posting, can be found in our paper "2015 Update: Class Actions in Health Law – Medical Products Liability and Actions Against Health Professionals", The OBA Institute Health Law Program, February 4, 2016

2O'Brien v Bard, 2015 ONSC 2470 at paras 3, 125, 136, and 255-256; Dine v Biomet, 2016 ONSC 4039 at para 38

3Vester v Boston Scientific, 2015 ONSC 7950 at paras 55-57, 119-123, 126, 135 and 138; Dine v Biomet, 2016 ONSC 4039 at para 38

4Dine v Biomet, 2015 ONSC 7050 at paras 4, 21-31, 34, 37-40 and 65; Dine v Biomet, 2016 ONSC 4039 at para 39

5Dine v Biomet, 2016 ONSC 4039 at para 9

6Dine v Biomet, 2016 ONSC 4039 at paras 25 and 30

7Dine v Biomet, 2016 ONSC 4039 at paras 26-29

8Hollick v Toronto (City), 2001 SCC 68

9Pro-Sys Consultants Ltd. v Microsoft Corp., 2013 SCC 57; Sun-Rype Products Ltd. v Archer Daniels Midland Co, 2013 SCC 58; AIC Ltd. v Fischer 2013 SCC 69

10Dine v Biomet, 2016 ONSC 4039 at paras 31-33

11Dine v Biomet, 2016 ONSC 4039 at paras 35-36

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

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

Peter W. Kryworuk
Rebecca Case
In association with
Related Topics
Related Articles
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
Registration (you must scroll down to set your data preferences)

Mondaq Ltd requires you to register and provide information that personally identifies you, including your content preferences, for three primary purposes (full details of Mondaq’s use of your personal data can be found in our Privacy and Cookies Notice):

  • To allow you to personalize the Mondaq websites you are visiting to show content ("Content") relevant to your interests.
  • To enable features such as password reminder, news alerts, email a colleague, and linking from Mondaq (and its affiliate sites) to your website.
  • To produce demographic feedback for our content providers ("Contributors") who contribute Content for free for your use.

Mondaq hopes that our registered users will support us in maintaining our free to view business model by consenting to our use of your personal data as described below.

Mondaq has a "free to view" business model. Our services are paid for by Contributors in exchange for Mondaq providing them with access to information about who accesses their content. Once personal data is transferred to our Contributors they become a data controller of this personal data. They use it to measure the response that their articles are receiving, as a form of market research. They may also use it to provide Mondaq users with information about their products and services.

Details of each Contributor to which your personal data will be transferred is clearly stated within the Content that you access. For full details of how this Contributor will use your personal data, you should review the Contributor’s own Privacy Notice.

Please indicate your preference below:

Yes, I am happy to support Mondaq in maintaining its free to view business model by agreeing to allow Mondaq to share my personal data with Contributors whose Content I access
No, I do not want Mondaq to share my personal data with Contributors

Also please let us know whether you are happy to receive communications promoting products and services offered by Mondaq:

Yes, I am happy to received promotional communications from Mondaq
No, please do not send me promotional communications from Mondaq
Terms & Conditions (the Website) is owned and managed by Mondaq Ltd (Mondaq). Mondaq grants you a non-exclusive, revocable licence to access the Website and associated services, such as the Mondaq News Alerts (Services), subject to and in consideration of your compliance with the following terms and conditions of use (Terms). Your use of the Website and/or Services constitutes your agreement to the Terms. Mondaq may terminate your use of the Website and Services if you are in breach of these Terms or if Mondaq decides to terminate the licence granted hereunder for any reason whatsoever.

Use of

To Use you must be: eighteen (18) years old or over; legally capable of entering into binding contracts; and not in any way prohibited by the applicable law to enter into these Terms in the jurisdiction which you are currently located.

You may use the Website as an unregistered user, however, you are required to register as a user if you wish to read the full text of the Content or to receive the Services.

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 or with the prior written consent of Mondaq. You may not use electronic or other means to extract details or information from the Content. Nor shall you extract information about users or Contributors in order to offer them any services or products.

In your use of the Website and/or Services you shall: comply with all applicable laws, regulations, directives and legislations which apply to your Use of the Website and/or Services in whatever country you are physically located including without limitation any and all consumer law, export control laws and regulations; provide to us true, correct and accurate information and promptly inform us in the event that any information that you have provided to us changes or becomes inaccurate; notify Mondaq immediately of any circumstances where you have reason to believe that any Intellectual Property Rights or any other rights of any third party may have been infringed; co-operate with reasonable security or other checks or requests for information made by Mondaq from time to time; and at all times be fully liable for the breach of any of these Terms by a third party using your login details to access the Website and/or Services

however, you shall not: do anything likely to impair, interfere with or damage or cause harm or distress to any persons, or the network; do anything that will infringe any Intellectual Property Rights or other rights of Mondaq or any third party; or use the Website, Services and/or Content otherwise than in accordance with these Terms; use any trade marks or service marks of Mondaq or the Contributors, or do anything which may be seen to take unfair advantage of the reputation and goodwill of Mondaq or the Contributors, or the Website, Services and/or Content.

Mondaq reserves the right, in its sole discretion, to take any action that it deems necessary and appropriate in the event it considers that there is a breach or threatened breach of the Terms.

Mondaq’s Rights and Obligations

Unless otherwise expressly set out to the contrary, nothing in these Terms shall serve to transfer from Mondaq to you, any Intellectual Property Rights owned by and/or licensed to Mondaq and all rights, title and interest in and to such Intellectual Property Rights will remain exclusively with Mondaq and/or its licensors.

Mondaq shall use its reasonable endeavours to make the Website and Services available to you at all times, but we cannot guarantee an uninterrupted and fault free service.

Mondaq reserves the right to make changes to the services and/or the Website or part thereof, from time to time, and we may add, remove, modify and/or vary any elements of features and functionalities of the Website or the services.

Mondaq also reserves the right from time to time to monitor your Use of the Website and/or services.


The Content is general information only. It is not intended to constitute legal advice or seek to be the complete and comprehensive statement of the law, nor is it intended to address your specific requirements or provide advice on which reliance should be placed. Mondaq and/or its Contributors and other suppliers make no representations about the suitability of the information contained in the Content for any purpose. All Content provided "as is" without warranty of any kind. Mondaq and/or its Contributors and other suppliers hereby exclude and disclaim all representations, warranties or guarantees with regard to the Content, including all implied warranties and conditions of merchantability, fitness for a particular purpose, title and non-infringement. To the maximum extent permitted by law, Mondaq expressly excludes all representations, warranties, obligations, and liabilities arising out of or in connection with all Content. In no event shall Mondaq 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 of the Content or performance of Mondaq’s Services.


Mondaq may alter or amend these Terms by amending them on the Website. By continuing to Use the Services and/or the Website after such amendment, you will be deemed to have accepted any amendment to these Terms.

These Terms shall be governed by and construed in accordance with the laws of England and Wales and you irrevocably submit to the exclusive jurisdiction of the courts of England and Wales to settle any dispute which may arise out of or in connection with these Terms. If you live outside the United Kingdom, English law shall apply only to the extent that English law shall not deprive you of any legal protection accorded in accordance with the law of the place where you are habitually resident ("Local Law"). In the event English law deprives you of any legal protection which is accorded to you under Local Law, then these terms shall be governed by Local Law and any dispute or claim arising out of or in connection with these Terms shall be subject to the non-exclusive jurisdiction of the courts where you are habitually resident.

You may print and keep a copy of these Terms, which form the entire agreement between you and Mondaq and supersede any other communications or advertising in respect of the Service and/or the Website.

No delay in exercising or non-exercise by you and/or Mondaq of any of its rights under or in connection with these Terms shall operate as a waiver or release of each of your or Mondaq’s right. Rather, any such waiver or release must be specifically granted in writing signed by the party granting it.

If any part of these Terms is held unenforceable, that part shall be enforced to the maximum extent permissible so as to give effect to the intent of the parties, and the Terms shall continue in full force and effect.

Mondaq shall not incur any liability to you on account of any loss or damage resulting from any delay or failure to perform all or any part of these Terms if such delay or failure is caused, in whole or in part, by events, occurrences, or causes beyond the control of Mondaq. Such events, occurrences or causes will include, without limitation, acts of God, strikes, lockouts, server and network failure, riots, acts of war, earthquakes, fire and explosions.

By clicking Register you state you have read and agree to our Terms and Conditions