Canada: Trends in Canadian Securities Class Actions: 2009 Update - New Wave Of Canadian Securities Class Actions Reaches The Certification Stage

Last Updated: March 19 2010

By Mark L. Berenblut and Bradley A. Heys1


In last year's study, we noted that securities class actions were on the rise in Canada and suggested that this new wave of filings is a reflection of the fact that class counsel seem prepared to test the new provisions of the provincial Securities Acts relating to secondary market liability.2 Although still in its infancy, the maturation process of this type of litigation continued during 2009.

Perhaps most notable in 2009, because of their potential impact on future trends in Canadian securities class actions, are the decisions of the Ontario Superior Court of Justice certifying three securities class actions, and the decision in IMAX granting leave for the plaintiffs to pursue claims under Part XXIII.1 of the Ontario Securities Act (OSA)—the first such ruling on an application to proceed with claims under the new secondary market liability provisions of the provincial Securities Acts.

There are now more than $14.7 billion in outstanding plaintiffs' claims in Canadian securities class actions.3 As we anticipated in our previous study, settlements in 2009 were well below the $890 million in total settlements observed in 2008. In 2009, six cases settled for total payments of approximately $55 million.4 In contrast to 2008, which witnessed a number of settlements involving payments of more than $20 million—Portus ($611 million), Biovail ($141 million), Hollinger ($46 million), and Atlas Cold Storage ($40 million)—the largest settlement in 2009 was $19.4 million (in Aurelian).


New Cases

Our database includes Canadian class actions brought on behalf of a class of investors in securities.5 This includes class actions brought by investors in shares of reporting issuers, as well as those brought by investors in other securities such as mutual fund units or investment certificates offered by investment managers.

Eight new cases were filed in 2009 in relation to the following issuers:

  • Allen-Vanguard Corporation
  • Bear Lake Gold Ltd.
  • Manulife Financial Corporation
  • NovaGold Resources Inc.
  • Shire International Real Estate Investment Ltd.
  • Stanford International Bank, Ltd.
  • Timminco Limited
  • Western Coal Corporation

This is fewer than the 10 cases filed in 2008, but still greater than filings in previous years.6 See Figure 1.

Types Of Cases

A record six new cases filed in 2009 involve allegations of misrepresentation and/or omissions by issuers, including claims brought under the new continuous disclosure provisions.7 This brings the total number of cases filed under these new provisions to 18. These filings are confirmation of the expectation that these new provisions would result in increased litigation against reporting issuers in Canada.

2009 also saw the new wave of Canadian securities class actions reach the certification and leave application stage. In IMAX, the first case to be brought under Part XXIII.1 of the OSA, the court both granted leave to proceed under these new provisions,8 and certified the action as a class action.9 To the extent that they influence future filings, these decisions and other recent rulings on class certification (including those in CP Ships10 and Aspen11), may ultimately prove to be an inflection point for this type of litigation.

The other two of the eight new cases filed in 2009 involve allegations of so-called Ponzi schemes—Shire International Real Estate and Stanford International Bank (the latter of which includes allegations that relate to both the Stanford and Madoff scandals that made headlines in the US during 2009).12

One notable difference (so far) to the experience in the US is the absence in Canada of class action filings relating to the credit crisis. Other than two cases filed in 2008, we have seen no class action securities filings directly related to the credit crisis. This lack of filings may be a reflection of the relatively smaller impact (in terms of bailouts and bankruptcies) of the credit crisis on the Canadian financial system as compared to that in the US.

That is not to say that there has been no litigation in Canada relating to the financial meltdown. As noted last year, the widely reported restructuring of the $32 billion Canadian Asset-Backed Commercial Paper (ABCP) market, which froze in August 2007, was completed in mid-2008. In late December 2009, regulators reached settlements with seven financial institutions which included fines totalling $138.8 million. Notably, under the terms of the restructuring plan approved by the courts, claims of note holders against the institutions that sold ABCP and other related parties cannot proceed unless the investors are able to establish fraud.

Although this restructuring was not achieved in the context of a class action litigation (and so is not captured in our database), this release from liability may well have pre-empted one or more class actions that may otherwise have been filed. Also, in December 2009, the Ontario Securities Commission commenced proceedings against Coventree Inc. in relation to its participation in the Canadian ABCP market.

Last year we suggested that certain overhanging threats of litigation against Toronto Stock Exchange (TSX)-listed companies may result in more options backdating class actions in Canada. This prediction was not borne out during 2009, as none of the newly filed cases included such claims.

Industry Sectors

Reflecting the composition of the Canadian economy, and consistent with past filings, the majority of 2009 filings were brought in relation to securities issued by companies in the minerals and financial sectors. These included two cases brought against gold mining companies, one against a coal mining company, and three cases against issuers in the financial sector.13

Both the absolute number and the proportion of cases brought against companies in the non-energy mineral sector have increased in recent years. Twenty-six percent of all cases filed from 2006 to 2009 (i.e., seven cases) were in this sector—significantly more than the 7% (i.e., two cases) filed against companies in this sector during the nine-year period from 1997 to 2005.

The proportion of filings against financial sector companies remained roughly constant: between 2006 and 2009, eight financial sector cases represented approximately 30% of all cases filed; between 1997 and 2005, eight such cases represented roughly 28% of all cases filed. A comparison of filings by sector for these two periods is illustrated in Figure 2.

Types Of Allegations

The categories of substantive allegations made in these cases have not changed significantly in recent years. The majority of allegations relate to an issuer's accounting, company-specific earnings guidance, or misrepresentations about operations.14 Although some changes in other types of allegations can be observed in Figure 3, this is more likely a function of the relatively small number of cases rather than any identifiable trend.

Time To Filing

Most cases (approximately 67%) are filed within the first six months following the end of a proposed class period. Over the 13-year period from 1997 to 2009, the average time to filing from the end of the proposed class period has been approximately six months and the median four months.

During the last two years (2008 and 2009), which saw a significant increase in the number of filings, half of all cases filed were filed within two months of the end of the proposed class period. On average, these recent cases were filed within approximately five months of the end of the class period.

This is somewhat faster than the time to filing for cases filed between 1997 and 2007. Cases filed during that period were filed on average approximately seven months following the end of the class period. The median for cases filed during that period is five months.

Since there is significant variation in filing times between cases, it is unclear at this time whether this is a meaningful trend toward faster filings. For example, two cases filed in 2009 were filed almost two years after the end of the proposed class period—10 times the median (and four times the average) for cases filed in 2008 and 2009. The cumulative proportion of cases filed over time for these two periods is illustrated in Figure 4.


Filings in shareholder class actions continue to include both common law and statutory claims. As we discussed in our previous study, although the new statutory civil remedies for secondary market misrepresentations are expected to make it easier for class actions to proceed, statutory limits on damages provide an incentive for plaintiffs to simultaneously plead common law negligent (and/or reckless and/or fraudulent) misrepresentation.

The causes of action pleaded by plaintiffs in cases against reporting issuers reflect these statutory amendments. Prior to the Bill 198 amendments in Ontario (which came into effect December 31, 2005), statements of claim often included causes of action brought under the material change provisions of the Securities Act and/or the material misrepresentation provisions of the Competition Act. Since 2005, these causes of action have not been pleaded, while 95% of all cases involve claims under the new provisions.

On the other hand, pleadings of common law negligence and negligent, reckless, and/or fraudulent misrepresentation continue to appear in the vast majority of these cases. The trends in the causes of action pleaded in these cases are illustrated in Figure 5.

Claims of shareholder oppression and claims of conspiracy each appear in approximately 20% of all cases, with no discernable trend over the period from 1997 to 2009.

One might have expected that, as more cases are filed under the new secondary market provisions, the proportion of cases involving prospectus claims might fall. In fact, so far at least, the proportion of cases involving prospectus claims has remained roughly constant at approximately one in three.



Six cases settled during 2009 for approximately $55 million in total payments by defendants.15 This is an average of approximately $9.1 million per settlement, and a median settlement of $9.2 million—roughly similar to the median settlement value in US securities class actions.16

2009 settlements averaged 15.3% of the amount of damages claimed by plaintiffs (excluding punitive damages). The median settlement was 9.2% of the claimed amount. Both figures are generally consistent with past experience in Canadian cases. See Figure 6 below.

Since 1997, class counsel fees have averaged approximately 30% of settlements.17 If this same fraction of settlements was paid in respect to 2009 settlements, total class counsel fees in 2009 would have been approximately $16.5 million.

Cross-Border Settlements

As noted last year, and not surprisingly, cross-border cases tend to result in higher settlement values than domestic cases in terms of absolute dollars and also as a percentage of the claimed amount. The SunOpta and CP Ships cases, both resolved in 2009, are consistent with that observation.

A global settlement in the SunOpta case amounted to approximately $11 million, or 11.3% of the claimed amount. The CP Ships case also settled in 2009 for $12.8 million (after certification), following an earlier settlement of a parallel US action for US$1.3 million (in total, these settlements are approximately 7% of the claimed amount).

Largest Settlement

The largest settlement during 2009, both in terms of absolute dollar value ($19.4 million) and as a percentage of the claim (49%), was achieved in the Aurelian case.18 Although this was not a cross-border case, it did involve some uncommon facts. The claim was brought by purchasers of warrants issued by the company. The term of the warrants was to be extended if the company were to apply for and obtain a Tier One listing with the TSX Venture Exchange. Because the company did not apply for a Tier One listing, the warrants' term was not extended before expiry. Plaintiffs alleged that the company breached its duty to investors in failing to apply for a Tier One listing. Following the expiry of the warrants, the company released positive news and its stock price increased significantly. Warrant holders claimed that they should be compensated for having been denied the opportunity to exercise their warrants following the company's disclosure of positive news.


One case, Allen-Vanguard, was partially dismissed in 2009. In that case, plaintiffs alleged that the company made certain misrepresentations in relation to its acquisition of Med-Eng Systems Inc. and claimed damages of $75 million (plus $5 million in punitive damages). In late 2009, the company received approval from the court for its plan of reorganization under the Companies' Creditors Arrangement Act. As part of that reorganization plan, the proposed class action against the company, but not the other named defendants, was dismissed.

Time To Resolution

The time it takes from the filing of a statement of claim to either a settlement or final court ruling can vary widely over time and across cases:

  • Of the 38 cases filed in 2007 or earlier, nine cases (24%) were resolved within two years (two of the nine cases were dismissed).
  • Of the 34 cases filed in 2006 or earlier, 14 (41%) were resolved within three years. However, none of the nine cases filed between 2000 and 2003 were resolved within two years, and only one of these was resolved within three years.
  • More recently, 26% of 19 cases filed between 2004 and 2007 settled within two years, and 47% of 15 cases filed between 2004 and 2006 settled within three years (note that cases filed in 2007 may still settle within three years).
  • So far, four of the 10 cases filed in 2008 have settled. Each of these cases settled between one and one-and-a-half years after the date of filing (note that four of the six cases that have not yet settled were filed in the second half of 2008 and so have not yet reached the one-and-a-half-year mark).


The net effect of eight newly filed cases and the resolution of five previously pending cases during 2009 leaves 23 pending cases in our database.19 Most of these cases were filed during the last three years (as one would expect), but there are still some outstanding cases that were filed nearly 10 years ago. The status of cases by year of filing is illustrated in Figure 7 below.20

As at the end of 2009, these 23 pending cases represent more than $14.7 billion in claims. The $10 billion claim against CIBC represents about 70% of these outstanding claims. Eight of these cases (including the CIBC case), that together represent more than $12.1 billion in claims, have corresponding parallel actions filed in the US. These cases are listed in Table 1.

Table 1 does not include cases filed in the US against Canadian companies for which (so far) there are no corresponding Canadian actions. Examples of these cases include a case relating to Nortel filed during 2009, a new case against Canadian Superior Energy (which had been the subject of a previous cross-border class action that settled in 2006), a case against Fairfax Financial filed in 2006, and cases brought by shareholders and noteholders of Livent Inc., which were filed in 1998 and 1999 and remain outstanding.


Canadian securities class action litigation continued to develop in 2009. Rulings of the courts on contested motions for certification and the first application for leave under the new Part XXIII.1 of the OSA during 2009 may set the tone for 2010.

Settlements during 2009 were significantly lower than settlements in 2008, although billions of dollars in claims remain outstanding.

Things to look for in 2010 and beyond include:

  • additional rulings from the courts in these cases, including possible appellate court decisions;
  • the pace and extent of the economic recovery, if any, that will take hold during 2010;
  • the requirement that Canadian public companies transition from Canadian GAAP to the International Financial Reporting Standards in preparing their financial statements beginning in 2011, with retrospective financial statements required for 2010; and
  • any changes in corporate governance practices and other actions of Canadian issuers in light of (the perception of) a growing threat of significant litigation.

We will also watch with interest to see if more cases related to the credit crisis or options backdating will emerge or whether those issues are now behind us—at least as far as securities class actions are concerned.


1. Mr. Berenblut is a Senior Vice President and Mr. Heys is a Vice President at NERA Economic Consulting. The authors thank Stephanie Plancich, David Tabak, and Robert Patton for helpful comments on earlier drafts of the paper, and Svetlana Starykh, Valentina Petkova, Tara Singh, Siddartha Krishnan, and other NERA researchers for their assistance.

2. Mark L. Berenblut, Bradley A. Heys, and Svetlana Starykh, "Trends in Canadian Securities Class Actions: 1997-2008, Canada Strikes its Own Course—Class Action Filings on the Rise," NERA Economic Consulting, January 2009.

3. The claims against CIBC account for $10 billion of this total.

4. Two other cases also settled or partially settled during 2009 and are not included in this total. These are discussed further below.

5. In compiling filing data, we have sought information on all unique class actions brought by investors in securities. We report a single filing where multiple causes of action have been commenced in respect of substantially similar facts.

6. In our 2008 paper, we reported nine cases filed in 2008. We have since refined the definition of relevant cases, resulting in the inclusion in our database of six additional cases. This change results in the inclusion of the Canada Life Financial Corporation case, filed 6/5/2008, and five additional cases that were filed in years prior to 2008. These are listed in the note to Figure 1, below.

7. Part XXIII.1 of the Ontario Securities Act and similar provisions under other provincial Securities Acts.

8. Silver v. Imax Corporation, et al., O.S.C.J., decision of K. van Rensburg J. (re Motion for Leave Under s.138.8 of the Ontario Securities Act), December 14, 2009. (Court File No. CV-06-3257-00). ("IMAX Leave Application")

9. Silver v. Imax Corporation, et al., O.S.C.J., decision of K. van Rensburg J. (re Rule 21 Motion and Motion for Certification), December 14, 2009. (Court File No. CV-06-3257-00).

10. McCann v. CP Ships Limited, et al., O.S.C.J., decision of Rady J., June 3, 2009. (Court File No. 46098CP). A similar action in Quebec was certified in 2008. A US action was previously settled. The certification motion in the BC action was pending when all Canadian actions were settled.

11. Allen v. Aspen Group Resources Corporation, et al., O.S.C.J., decision of G.R. Strathy J., December 4, 2009 (Court File No. 02-CV-241587CP).

12. Other alleged Ponzi schemes also made headlines in Canada (e.g., the case related to the Institute For Financial Learning in Alberta). Although class actions have been initiated in some of these cases (in addition to criminal charges), many do not involve investments in a security and are not included in our database.

13. We code cases based on the industry sector of the issuer of the securities that are the subject of the litigation, as reported by FactSet Research Systems Inc.

14. Most securities class actions involve multiple allegations. In 56 cases filed in Canada from 1997 through 2009, there are a total of 104 allegations. Where we have not been able to obtain a copy of the statement of claim, we have coded allegations based on news stories and/or complaints filed in parallel actions in the US (if any).

15. Settlements were also reached in two other cases during 2009: a settlement of the Canada Life Financial case, and a partial settlement of the Transamerica Life case. No information is available regarding the value of the settlement in Canada Life Financial, which, it appears, will be based on actual claims made by class members. A partial settlement in Transamerica Life for $52 million relates to claims of excess management fees charged by the defendants; claims relating to class members' investment in certain funds have not yet been resolved.

16. Stephanie Plancich and Svetlana Starykh, "Recent Trends in Securities Class Action Litigation: 2009 Year-End Update," NERA Economic Consulting, December 2009, p. 1. (Excluding the settlement of the IPO securities laddering cases, the median settlement in US cases for 2009 is $9 million. Median settlements in 2007 and 2008 were similar.)

17. Our database includes fees information for 13 cases from 1997-2009, including two cases that settled in 2009.

18. The partial settlement of the Transamerica Life case for $52 million exceeds the settlement in Aurelian, but since it is both partial settlement and relates specifically to allegations of excess management fees, we have not included this amount in the discussion above. The partial settlement in that case is approximately 10% of the amount claimed.

19. Of the total of 56 cases in our database, 23 are pending, 29 have settled, and four have been dismissed.

20. Although we report Phillips Services as a dismissed case (originally filed in 1998) based on the decision of the Ontario Superior Court in 2001 (Menegon v. Phillip Services Corp., 2001 CanLII 28396), we understand that a new claim was made during 2003. This new claim was made by a different plaintiff, but is in relation to substantially similar facts. The plaintiff in this case is represented by the same counsel as in the original case. We have not reported this as a new filing for 2003.

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.

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.