Bruno v. Canada
T-2359-98
Hargrave P.
31/5/99
10 pp.
Class actions-Motion for order certifying action as class action with plaintiffs representing all persons whose monies, documents improperly seized by faulty requirements to pay, and whose personal information improperly accessed through use of faulty requirements to provide information, documents-Plaintiffs tax debtors-Minister issuing requirements to pay to various banks, other institutions-Plaintiffs alleging requirements improperly issued-Preliminary issue whether plaintiffs, as representatives of class, might fairly, properly, diligently represent all, substantially all, members of class-Must show speak for persons other than themselves who share same interests-Unnecessary to obtain consent of other members-Plaintiffs' representation in large, complex litigation may not be fair, adequate representation required-Plaintiffs neither seeking to identify, recruit members of class, nor demonstrating speaking for person other than themselves-Represent too many views, interests to be able to properly provide legal representation for large number of individuals-Not establishing sufficient resources, or means of raising resources, to properly conduct litigation on behalf of large class of people-Federal Court Rules, 1998, r. 114(1) providing where two or more persons having same interest in proceeding, proceeding may be brought by or against any one or more of them as representing some or all of them-Court must weigh detriments to administration of justice, such as undue consumption of time, difficulty of management, against benefit to plaintiffs, other members of class-Validity of class action depends on three basic elements enunciated in Bedford (Duke of) v. Ellis, [1901] A.C. 1 (H.L.): same interest for all parties involved; common grievances; relief must be beneficial to all-(1) Simply having knowledge of members of such class will not suffice-Perimeter of class based on that definition alone too ambiguous, unwieldy-Court not convinced plaintiffs had no other avenues by which to establish following for cause-Could have at least tried number of other methods to identify members of class-(2) No indication people, other than plaintiffs, sharing same grievances, same interests as plaintiffs-No indication members of proposed class will have same common interests, grievance as plaintiffs-Interests of individual plaintiffs varying even among themselves to extent would confuse class (plaintiff Bruno seeking return of monies seized, while wife seeking to nullify registered tax certificate)-Such degree of difference, albeit against common defendant would preclude notion of common interest-Many taxpayers may already have settled tax liabilities involving requirements to pay-(3) No single measure of damages will be adequate since remedies sought by each of plaintiffs vary substantially-Federal Court Rules, 1998, SOR/98-106, r. 114(1).