Le 19 janvier dernier, la thèse doctorale de la professeure Catherine Piché a été citée par le juge Morgan de la Cour supérieure d'Ontario, dans le dossier d'action collective relatif à la fixation concertée du prix du pain.
 At that stage, it may become relevant to consider whether it is appropriate that part of any settlement payment by Loblaw be composed of a $25 card that can only be used at a Loblaw store. That type of settlement – often dubbed a ‘coupon settlement’ – has been subject to some criticism in the class action literature: see Catherine Piché, Fairness in Class Action Settlements (McGill University, 2010), at pp. 59-64; Christopher R. Leslie, “The Need to Study Coupon Settlements in Class Action Litigation,” 18 Geo. J. Legal Ethics 1395, 1396–98 (2005). Indeed, Judge Richard Posner has characterized the use of coupons as currency by a Defendant as “a warning sign of a questionable settlement”: Saltzman v Pella Corporation, 606 F.3d 391 (7th Cir. 2010). There is an argument that since corporate behavior modification is one of the important goals of class action litigation, see Hollick v Toronto (City), 2001 SCC 68 (CanLII),  3 SCR 158, at para. 27, coupons issued by a Defendant – which benefit the Defendant by providing increased marketing and profit opportunities – are in some instances not an appropriate settlement device.
Lire la décision complète David c Loblaws, 2018 ONSC 198 ici.
Ce contenu a été mis à jour le 30 janvier 2018 à 10 h 58 min.