In a recent judgment, the Québec Superior Court has provided a clear demonstration of its willingness to critically assess the merits of class actions, despite them meeting the authorization threshold. The case in question, Option Consommateurs c. Société des loteries du Québec (Loto-Québec), 2025 QCCS 476, involved allegations of misrepresentations and omissions by Loto-Québec in its online game offering. This decision is notable for being among the relatively few instances where a class action has been tried and decided on the merits.
Unproven Québec Consumer Protection Act violations
The plaintiff contended that Loto-Québec's online game "Big Money Slingo", which combines elements of slot machines and bingo, misrepresented the role of chance in its gameplay. Specifically, the plaintiff argued that the game gave the false impression that random odds were a factor throughout each round. The plaintiff claimed that this constituted several breaches of the Québec Consumer Protection Act (CPA).
The Court's examination of this claim contains a detailed analysis of the expert evidence presented by both parties. The Court deemed the mathematical expert evidence provided by the plaintiff on the "near-successes" generated by the game to be unreliable and unhelpful, subscribing instead to the defendant's expert evidence, which suggested that random odds would come into play during each round, albeit only once and at the very beginning of the game.
The Court found that the plaintiff had failed to prove that Loto-Québec had made false or misleading representation, applying the test set out by the Supreme Court of Canada in Richard v. Time. Similarly, the plaintiff had failed to show that the moment at which random odds would affect the gameplay would be a determining and important criterion for all members of the class when deciding to participate in the online game. As a result, the plaintiff did not discharge his burden of proof to demonstrate that Loto-Québec had engaged in a prohibited practice under the Québec CPA.
Another class action dismissed on the merits
Class action dismissal on the merits is not an exception in Québec. This case is reminiscent of the outcome in numerous Québec class action judgments issued since we reported on Lamoureux c. Organisme canadien de réglementation du commerce des valeurs mobilières (OCRCVM), 2021 QCCS 1093, in "First merits decision dismissing privacy class action in Canada". More recently, Fortin c. Mazda Canada inc., 2022 QCCA 635, Lussier c. Expedia inc., 2024 QCCS 472, and Duguay c. General Motors du Canada ltée, 2023 QCCS 3223, were tried on the merits and dismissed by Québec Courts.
Takeaways
The Option Consommateurs decision underscores a discernible trend within the Québec Superior Court to scrutinize the evidence underpinning class actions rigorously. Legal practitioners must recognize that the authorization of a class action does not guarantee a favourable judgment on the merits. This case serves as a reminder that the evidentiary burden remains with the plaintiff throughout the proceedings.
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.
