COVID-19 class-action application rejected by BC judge as an abuse of process

COVID-19 class-action application rejected by BC judge as an abuse of process

A BC Supreme Court judge has ruled that a class-action lawsuit seeking to represent all adults in the province whose rights were allegedly violated by provincial orders during the COVID-19 pandemic cannot proceed because of “so many self-inflicted problems.”

long written decision The hearing on Monday, chaired by Justice David Crerar, considered evidence presented in 30 days of hearings and written submissions, described as a “wall of binders” until 2022.

A group of 171 people called the Canadian Society for the Advancement of Science in Public Policy was seeking certification for harms caused by allegedly unfair COVID-19-related orders.

The society argued that provincial health officer Dr. Bonnie Henry and the province used executive powers based on unproven scientific and legal grounds, resulting in “devastating consequences” for adults in the province.

The proposed claim states that these measures violate various rights granted to Canadians under the Charter of Rights and Freedoms.

If successful, it could result in millions of tests for B.C.’s estimated four million adults and ultimately a one-time payment afforded by taxpayers.

Crerar did not rule on the merits of the allegations or facts or “whether the province’s or health officer’s actions were good, bad, or otherwise”, but rather whether it made practical sense to bring the action as a class action.

Crerar ruled that he did not do so and considered it an abuse of process for several reasons, including that he had sought a “final round” based around “more rigorous and respectful” judicial reviews of the orders, many of which were rejected.

‘Unpleasant arguments and other violations’

“Furthermore, despite judicial warnings, and despite eight versions of her claim, Plaintiff persists in pleadings that are replete with vexatious logic and other violations of the pleading rules: another abuse of process,” Crerar wrote.

Crerar also ruled that the claim did not pass the test for certification because it failed five conditions, including having a representative plaintiff who would “fairly and adequately represent the interests of the class.”

The court heard at a hearing in December 2022 how diverse the potential claims were – ranging from people who were upset they could not be vaccinated sooner, to people who did not want to be vaccinated at all.

In the decision, Crerar wrote that it is conceivable that a more carefully focused and crafted legal argument could challenge provincial COVID-19-related health orders, but “that is not the case with the present claim.”

CATEGORIES
Share This

COMMENTS

Wordpress (0)
Disqus ( )