Roy O'connor LLP

Roy O'connor LLP
  • Home
  • Roy O’Connor LLP
  • Practice Areas
    • Class Actions
    • Corporate Commercial & Securities Litigation
    • Civil Litigation
  • Lawyers
    • Peter L. Roy
    • David F. O’Connor
    • Sean M. Grayson
    • J. Adam Dewar
    • Robert Spiegel
    • Derek McKay
    • James Katsuras
  • News
  • Current Cases
    • Athletic Trust Tax
    • Volkswagen Diesel Engine Class Action
    • Volkswagen Diesel Emissions Class Action – Former Owners & Lessees
    • Hepatitis C Class Action
    • Algo Centre Mall
    • Liquid Silicone
    • Transamerica Fund
    • Unpaid Overtime – CIBC
    • Unpaid Overtime – Livingston International
    • Unpaid Overtime – Scotiabank
    • Mettrum Ltd. Medical Marijuana Recall
    • VW, Audi, Porsche, Bentley Fuel Consumption Class Action
    • City of Thunder Bay Leaking Pipes Class Action
    • RBC DS Unpaid Vacation & Holiday Pay Class Action
    • Bell Rural Internet Class Action
  • Contact Us

Home ≫ Appeal Court affirms Denial of Class Certification against Our Defendant Clients (Mutual Fund Dealer and Investment Advisors)

Appeal Court affirms Denial of Class Certification against Our Defendant Clients (Mutual Fund Dealer and Investment Advisors)

Mar 31, 2022

In reasons for decision released on March 1, 2022, the Ontario Divisional Court maintained the dismissal of the Plaintiffs’ certification motion in a  $40 million  proposed class action in Boal v. International Capital Management Inc. David O’Connor and Sean Grayson of Roy O’Connor LLP acted for the Defendants both on the motion below and on the appeal  that saw the certification motion dismissed against our Defendant Clients.

 The Divisional Court’s decision, as well as the decision below provide important commentary and direction on the scope of financial advisors’ duties to their clients as well as on threshold certification issues.

According to the Divisional Court:

“The goal of the imposition of fiduciary duties is to protect a relationship the law recognizes as one of high trust and confidence, based on the implicit dependency and vulnerability to another. With the recognition of the relationship comes the imposition of proscriptive duties, notably the no-profit rule and the no-conflict rules, as well as the prescriptive duties of good faith and confidence. But duties of good faith, care, confidentiality, and disclosure apply to a variety of non-fiduciaries as well. As the motion judge set out, the fiduciary standard is exceptional. Other legal concepts which may apply – protection in contract, tort, and unjust enrichment – are available to regulate the conduct alleged here, albeit not on a class, but an individual basis. While the MFDA rules and the FP Code are a part of the analysis, they are not the whole of the analysis.

For these reasons, the appeal is dismissed.”

 

Recent News

Roy O’Connor LLP named Finalist for a Benchmark 2022 Firm of the Year Award

Learn more

Appeal Court affirms Denial of Class Certification against Our Defendant Clients (Mutual Fund Dealer and Investment Advisors)

Learn more

Court of Appeal confirms CIBC Liability to Our Employee Class in Landmark Overtime Class Action

Learn more

Settlement Approved in VW, Audi, Porsche & Bentley Fuel Consumption Class Action – Claims Period Open

Learn more
  • © Roy O'Connor LLP 2022
  • Disclaimer & Terms Of Use