There has been significant academic buzz about Silver v. Imax, an Ontario case certifying a global class of shareholders alleging statutory and common law misrepresentation in connection with a secondary market distribution of shares. Although global class actions on a more limited scale have been certified in Canada prior to Imax, it can now be said that global classes have "officially" arrived in Canada. Many predict that the Imax decision means that Ontario will become the new center for the resolution of global securities disputes. This is particularly so after the United States largely relinquished this role in Morrison v. National Australia Bank.
Whether Imax proves to be a meaningful precedent or simply an aberration will largely depend on whether the court dealt appropriately with the conflict of laws issues at the heart of the case. No author has yet addressed the conflict of laws complications posed by the certification of global class actions in Canada; this Article seeks to fill that void. In particular, I use the Imax case as a lens through which to canvass the conflict of laws issues raised by the certification of global classes. I look at the difficult questions of jurisdiction simpliciter, recognition of judgments, choice of law, parallel proceedings, and notice/procedural rights that need to be addressed now that global classes have come to Canada.
32 Nw. J. Int'l L. & Bus. 305, 364 (2012)
Banking and Finance Law Commons, Civil Procedure Commons, Common Law Commons, Comparative and Foreign Law Commons, Conflict of Laws Commons, Securities Law Commons, Transnational Law Commons
This article originally appeared in 32 Nw. J. Int'l L. & Bus. 305, 364 (2012)
Also available HeinOnline: http://heinonline.org/HOL/Page?public=false&handle=hein.journals/nwjilb32&collection=journals&id=319