<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:slash="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/slash/"
	>

<channel>
	<title>The Litigator - Affleck Greene McMurtry, LLP &#187; Class Actions and Other Private Actions</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.thelitigator.ca/index.php/category/competition-law/class-private-actions/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.thelitigator.ca</link>
	<description>Competition Law and Commercial Litigation Updates</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Thu, 09 Sep 2010 19:15:40 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9.1</generator>
	<language>en</language>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
			<item>
		<title>Canadian Plaintiffs Acheive a Breakthrough in Certifying Price Fixing Class Actions</title>
		<link>http://www.thelitigator.ca/index.php/2010/08/26/canadian-plaintiffs-acheive-a-breakthrough-in-certifying-price-fixing-class-actions/</link>
		<comments>http://www.thelitigator.ca/index.php/2010/08/26/canadian-plaintiffs-acheive-a-breakthrough-in-certifying-price-fixing-class-actions/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 26 Aug 2010 20:21:15 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Michael Osborne</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Class Actions and Other Private Actions]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Competition Law]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Canadian class action]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Class Actions]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[plaintiffs]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[price fixing]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[proving damages]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.thelitigator.ca/?p=731</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[<p>Courts in two Canadian cases have recently made it easier to certify direct and indirect-purchaser <a href="http://www.thelitigator.ca/index.php/tag/class-actions/" class="st_tag internal_tag" rel="tag nofollow" title="Posts tagged with Class Actions">class actions</a> seeking damages for alleged <a href="http://www.thelitigator.ca/index.php/tag/price-fixing/" class="st_tag internal_tag" rel="tag nofollow" title="Posts tagged with price fixing">price fixing</a>. Formerly, the difficulty of proving damages suffered by indirect purchasers on a class-wide basis was a major impediment&#8230;</p>]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.thelitigator.ca/index.php/2010/08/26/canadian-plaintiffs-acheive-a-breakthrough-in-certifying-price-fixing-class-actions/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>The IMAX Case: Superior Court certifies first-ever Ontario shareholder class action for misrepresentations on the secondary market</title>
		<link>http://www.thelitigator.ca/index.php/2010/02/05/the-imax-case-superior-court-certifies-first-ever-ontario-shareholder-class-action-for-misrepresentations-on-the-secondary-market/</link>
		<comments>http://www.thelitigator.ca/index.php/2010/02/05/the-imax-case-superior-court-certifies-first-ever-ontario-shareholder-class-action-for-misrepresentations-on-the-secondary-market/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 05 Feb 2010 16:29:36 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>David N. Vaillancourt</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Class Actions and Other Private Actions]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Commercial Litigation]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Securities Litigation]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[139.3]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[accountants]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[accounting]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[audit]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[auditors]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[class action]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[directors]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[disclosure]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[films]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[financial statements]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[GAAP]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[IMAX]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[misrepresentation]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[movies]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[officers]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[public]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[reliance]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[revenue]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[secondary market]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[securities]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[securities act]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[shareholders]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[shares]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Silver]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[stocks]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[theatres]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[van Rensburg]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.thelitigator.ca/?p=580</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[In a pair of decisions released the same day, Justice Katherine van Rensburg of the Ontario Superior Court of Justice became the first judge to consider the statutory remedy created under section 138.3 of the Ontario Securities Act (the “Act”) for shareholders of public companies who suffer damages from public company misrepresentations on the secondary securities market in documents such as annual financial statements and other public documents.]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.thelitigator.ca/index.php/2010/02/05/the-imax-case-superior-court-certifies-first-ever-ontario-shareholder-class-action-for-misrepresentations-on-the-secondary-market/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Complex Distribution Chain Kills DRAM Class Action – Pro-Sys Consultants Ltd. v. Infineon Technologies AG</title>
		<link>http://www.thelitigator.ca/index.php/2009/04/07/complex-distribution-chain-kills-dram-class-action-%e2%80%93-pro-sys-consultants-ltd-v-infineon-technologies-ag/</link>
		<comments>http://www.thelitigator.ca/index.php/2009/04/07/complex-distribution-chain-kills-dram-class-action-%e2%80%93-pro-sys-consultants-ltd-v-infineon-technologies-ag/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 07 Apr 2009 23:32:02 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Michael Osborne</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Class Actions and Other Private Actions]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Competition Law]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[BC Supreme Court]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[canada]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[class action]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[class action legislation]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[cy-pres]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[DRAM memory]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[infineon technologies ag]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[price fixing]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[United States]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Waiver of Tort]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.thelitigator.ca/?p=436</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[A proposed class action by purchasers of electronic goods containing DRAM memory chips would degenerate into a series of individual trials, the British Columbia Supreme Court has held in Pro-Sys Consultants Ltd. v. Infineon Technologies AG.2 Key issues, including whether the plaintiffs paid more because of price-fixing by manufacturers of the chips, could not be determined on a class-wide basis. The court thus refused to certify the action as a class proceeding.]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.thelitigator.ca/index.php/2009/04/07/complex-distribution-chain-kills-dram-class-action-%e2%80%93-pro-sys-consultants-ltd-v-infineon-technologies-ag/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Class action attacks “economic effect” of DuPont’s prices</title>
		<link>http://www.thelitigator.ca/index.php/2008/02/15/class-action-attacks-%e2%80%9ceconomic-effect%e2%80%9d-of-dupont%e2%80%99s-prices/</link>
		<comments>http://www.thelitigator.ca/index.php/2008/02/15/class-action-attacks-%e2%80%9ceconomic-effect%e2%80%9d-of-dupont%e2%80%99s-prices/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 15 Feb 2008 01:11:42 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Michael Osborne</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Class Actions and Other Private Actions]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Competition Law]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[antitrust]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[competition]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[distribution]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[dupont]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Ontario Superior Court]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[resale price maintenance]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[RPM]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.thelitigator.ca/?p=231</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Canada’s first class action alleging vertical price maintenance may have far reaching consequences for Canadian manufacturers and distributors.]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.thelitigator.ca/index.php/2008/02/15/class-action-attacks-%e2%80%9ceconomic-effect%e2%80%9d-of-dupont%e2%80%99s-prices/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>AGO contributes to ABA handbook</title>
		<link>http://www.thelitigator.ca/index.php/2007/05/15/ago-contributes-to-aba-handbook/</link>
		<comments>http://www.thelitigator.ca/index.php/2007/05/15/ago-contributes-to-aba-handbook/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 15 May 2007 02:11:31 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Michael Osborne</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Class Actions and Other Private Actions]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Competition Law]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[american bar association]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[American Bar Association Handbook]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[antitrust law]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[canadian lawyers]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Class Actions]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[litigation handbook]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[price fixing]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[The Indirect Purchaser Litigation Handbook]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[us supreme court]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.thelitigator.ca/?p=135</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Many Canadian class actions alleging price fixing conspiracies are run parallel to similar US class actions. As a result, this handbook will be useful to Canadian lawyers seeking to understand how the US class action system deals with issues surrounding indirect purchasers.]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.thelitigator.ca/index.php/2007/05/15/ago-contributes-to-aba-handbook/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Passing-on no defence; unlawfully collected taxes must be refunded, Supreme Court rules</title>
		<link>http://www.thelitigator.ca/index.php/2007/01/10/passing-on-no-defence-unlawfully-collected-taxes-must-be-refunded-supreme-court-rules/</link>
		<comments>http://www.thelitigator.ca/index.php/2007/01/10/passing-on-no-defence-unlawfully-collected-taxes-must-be-refunded-supreme-court-rules/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 10 Jan 2007 23:31:49 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Michael Osborne</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Class Actions]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Class Actions and Other Private Actions]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Commercial Litigation]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Competition Law]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[1867; restitution; Competition law; passing-on defence; indirect purchasers]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Constitutional law; provincial powers; indirect taxes; Constitution Act]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.thelitigator.ca/?p=316</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Governments must refund money they collect through unconstitutional taxes, and cannot rely on the so-called ""passing-on"" defence to avoid repayment, the Supreme Court ruled in January 2007.The court's rejection of the passing-on defence may have major implications in private litigation, particularly competition (antitrust) cases.]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.thelitigator.ca/index.php/2007/01/10/passing-on-no-defence-unlawfully-collected-taxes-must-be-refunded-supreme-court-rules/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Restitution or windfall?</title>
		<link>http://www.thelitigator.ca/index.php/2006/11/11/restitution-or-windfall/</link>
		<comments>http://www.thelitigator.ca/index.php/2006/11/11/restitution-or-windfall/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Sat, 11 Nov 2006 01:15:55 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Michael Osborne</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Class Actions]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Class Actions and Other Private Actions]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Commercial Litigation]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Competition Law]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Criminal Matters]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Frauds, Misrepresentation, Deceit]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[class proceedings]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Constructive trust]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Equitable remedies]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Restitution]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Waiver of Tort]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.thelitigator.ca/?p=348</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Can consumers who obtain a defective product for free recover profits earned by the manufacturer, even though those consumers suffer no damages whatsoever? Most non-lawyers would likely say:  no. However, the Ontario Divisional Court recently affirmed a decision certifying a class action against Johnson &#038; Johnson that raises this question.]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.thelitigator.ca/index.php/2006/11/11/restitution-or-windfall/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Synthetic rubber and polyester staple class actions settle</title>
		<link>http://www.thelitigator.ca/index.php/2005/11/02/synthetic-rubber-and-polyester-staple-class-actions-settle/</link>
		<comments>http://www.thelitigator.ca/index.php/2005/11/02/synthetic-rubber-and-polyester-staple-class-actions-settle/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 02 Nov 2005 20:41:19 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Michael Osborne</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Class Actions and Other Private Actions]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Competition Law]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Class Actions]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[dupont dow elastomers]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[ethylene propylene diene monomer]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[indictments]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[synthetic rubbers]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.thelitigator.ca/?p=194</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Settlements have been reached in two class actions alleging price fixing in the market for two kinds of synthetic rubber as well as polyester staple.]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.thelitigator.ca/index.php/2005/11/02/synthetic-rubber-and-polyester-staple-class-actions-settle/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
	</channel>
</rss>
