Supreme Court

Decision Information

Decision Content

SUPREME COURT OF NOVA SCOTIA

Citation: Morrison Estate v. Nova Scotia (Attorney General), 2010 NSSC  196

 

Date: 20100520

Docket: Hfx No. 230887

Registry: Halifax

 

Between:

The Estate of Elmer Stanislaus Morrison, By his Executor or Representative Joan Marie Morrison, Joan Marie Morrison, John Kin Hung Lee, By His Legal Guardian Elizabeth Lee and Elizabeth Lee

 

Plaintiffs

v.

The Attorney General of Nova Scotia, representing Her Majesty the Queen in right of the Province of Nova Scotia, (Department of Health), The Minister of Health for the province of Nova Scotia, and the Executive Director of Continuing Care for the Province of Nova Scotia

 

Defendants

 

LIBRARY HEADING

 

 

Judge:                            The Honourable Justice A. David MacAdam

 

Heard:                            January 20th and April 12th, 2010 in Halifax, Nova Scotia

 

 

Subject:                Class Proceedings Act; class proceeding certification hearing; criteria for certification of class proceeding.

 

Summary:             The plaintiffs sought certification of a class proceeding.  The proposed class proceeding was on behalf of individuals allegedly affected adversely by a provincial government nursing home policy

 

Issues:                   (1) Whether the proceeding should be certified as a class proceeding pursuant to section 7 of the Class Proceedings Act and (2) interpretation of s.7(1)(a) of the Act.

 


Argument:            The only live issue was whether s.7(1)(a) of the Class Proceedings Act, which requires that “the pleadings disclose or the notice of application discloses a cause of action,” is satisfied by showing that the pleadings disclose a single cause of action, or whether the court must consider every cause of action pleaded and decide which are disclosed.

 

Result:                  The relief sought on a certification hearing is a decision as to whether the proceeding should be certified as a class proceeding.  The plaintiffs are not seeking, and are not required by the Act to seek, a determination of whether every cause of action pleaded is sustainable.  It remains open to a defendant to pursue a motion to strike.  In this case, the pleadings disclosed a cause of action, and certification was ordered.

 

 

THIS INFORMATION SHEET DOES NOT FORM PART OF THE COURT'S DECISION.  QUOTES MUST BE FROM THE DECISION, NOT THIS LIBRARY SHEET.

 You are being directed to the most recent version of the statute which may not be the version considered at the time of the judgment.