|
Badamshin c. Option Consommateurs |
2016 QCCA 239 |
COURT OF APPEAL
CANADA
PROVINCE OF QUEBEC
REGISTRY OF MONTREAL
|
No: |
500-09-025854-167 |
|
|
(500-06-000703-146) |
|
|
|
MINUTES OF THE HEARING |
|
|
|
DATE : |
February 8, 2016 |
|
THE HONOURABLE mark schrager, J.A. |
|
PETITIONER |
ATTORNEY |
|
YANA BADAMSHIN |
Mtre JEFF ORENSTEIN Mtre ANDREA GRASS (Groupe de droit des consommateurs inc.)
|
|
RESPONDENTS |
ATTORNEY |
|
OPTION CONSOMMATEURS LOUIS-ALEXANDRE LECLAIRE |
Mtre MAXIME NASR Mtre DANIEL BELLEAU (Belleau Lapointe, s.e.n.c.r.l.)
|
|
IMPLEADED PARTIES |
ATTORNEY |
|
MATHIEU HÉRARD
TAIYO YUDEN CO. LTD. TAIYO YUDEN (U.S.A.) INC.
NICHICON CORPORATION NICHICON (AMERICA) CORPORATION
SAMSUNG ELECTRO-MECHANICS SAMSUNG ELECTRO-MECHANICS AMERICA INC.
ROHM CO. LTD. ROHM SEMICONDUCTOR U.S.A., LLC
PANASONIC CORPORATION PANASONIC CORPORATION OF NORTH AMERICA PANASONIC CANADA INC. SANYO NORTH AMERICA CORPORATION
MATSUO ELECTRIC CO. LTD. MATSUO ELECTRONICS OF AMERICA, INC.
ELNA CO. LTD. ELNA AMERICA INC.
RUBYCON AMERICA
KEMET CORPORATION KEMET ELECTRONICS CORPORATION
HITACHI CHEMICAL CO., LTD. HITACHI AIC INCORPORATED HITACH CHEMICAL COMPANY AMERICA, LTD. HITACHI LTD.
VISHAY INTERTECHNOLOGY INC.
AVX CORPORATION
NEC TOKIN CORPORATION NEC TOKIN AMERICA INC.
NIPPON CHEMI-CON CORPORATION UNITED CHEMI-CON CORPORATION
TDK CORPORATION TDK-EPC CORPORATION TDK U.S.A. CORPORATION TDK-EPC CORPORATION OF CANADA
NEC CORPORATION NEC CANADA INC.
ARCHIE MARTIN |
Mtre GUY PAQUETTE (Paquette Gadler Inc.)
Mtre BERNARD AMYOT Mtre MARIE-NOËL ROCHON (LCM Avocats inc./LCM Attorneys Inc.)
Mtre SIDNEY ELBAZ (McMillan S.E.N.C.R.L., s.r.l.)
Mtre ROBERT TORRALBO (Blake, Cassels & Graydon s.e.n.c.r.l.)
Mtre NOAH MICHAEL BOUDREAU (Fasken Martineau DuMoulin SENCRL)
Mtre VINCENT DE L’ETOILE (Langlois avocats, S.E.N.C.R.L.)
Mtre LAURENT NAHMIASH (Dentons Canada LLP)
Mtre TANIA DA SILVA Mtre LUCY-MAUDE LACHANCE (DLA Piper (Canada) s.e.n.c.r.l.)
Mtre PASCALE DIONNE-BOURASSA (d3b Avovats s.e.n.c.) (Absent)
Mtre KARINE CHÊNEVERT (Borden Ladner Gervais, s.e.n.c.r.l., s.r.l.)
Mtre YVES MARTINEAU (Stikeman Elliott s.e.n.c.r.l., s.r.l.)
Mtre MADELEINE RENAUD (McCarthy Tétrault s.e.n.c.r.l., s.r.l.)
Mtre FADI AMINE (Miller Thomson SENCRL / LLP) (Absent)
Mtre MYRIAM BRIXI (Lavery, De Billy s.e.n.c.r.l.)
Mtre JEAN-MICHEL BOUDREAU (Irving Mitchell Kalichman SENCRL/LLP)
Mtre NICHOLAS RODRIGO (Davies Ward Phillips & Vineberg s.e.n.c.r.l, s.r.l) (Absent)
Mtre ALEXANDRE FALLON (Osler, Hoskin & Harcourt, S.E.N.C.R.L./s.r.l.)
Mtre DANIEL CHUNG (Merchant Law Group) (Absent)
|
|
DESCRIPTION : |
Motion de bene esse for leave to appeal a judgment rendered on December 22, 2015 by the Honourable Judge Michel Déziel of the Superior Court Cour, district of Montreal. (Articles
Motion by the impleaded party, Mathieu Hérard for leave to intervene in the course of the appeal proceedings. (Articles
|
|
Clerk : Mihary Andrianaivo |
Courtroom : RC-18 |
|
|
|
HEARING |
|
|
|
9:45 |
Start of the hearing. Discussion between the Judge et Mtre Orenstein. |
|
9:48 |
Observations by Mtre Nasr. |
|
9:51 |
Recess. |
|
10:02 10:04 |
Resumption of the hearing. BY THE JUDGE: Ruling on the Motion de bene esse for leave to appeal - See page 5. |
|
10:06 |
Submissions by Mtre Paquette regarding his request for leave to intervene in the course of the appeal proceedings. |
|
10:07 |
Observations by Mtre Nasr. |
|
10:08 |
BY THE JUDGE: Ruling on the Motion by the impleaded party, Mathieu Hérard for leave to intervene in the course of the appeal proceedings - See page 5. End of the hearing. |
|
Mihary Andrianaivo |
|
Clerk |
BY THE JUDGE
|
|
|
JUDGMENT |
|
|
On the Motion de bene esse for leave to appeal :
[1] Seeing the application de bene esse for leave to appeal from a judgment rendered on December 22, 2015 by the Honourable Michel Déziel of the Superior Court, District of Montreal; ordering, inter alia, the suspension of appellants’ application to authorise a class action;
[2] Seeing particularly paragraph 2 of the application for leave to appeal de bene esse;
[3] Considering the interest of justice to avoid the possibility of contradictory judgments;
THE UNDERSIGNED:
[4] REFERS the application de bene esse for leave to appeal to the panel of three judges, if any, who may hear a motion to dismiss the appeal.
On the Motion by the impleaded party, Mathieu Hérard for leave to intervene in the course of the appeal proceedings :
[5] Considering the above judgment, referring the motion de bene esse for leave to appeal to a panel of three judges;
THE UNDERSIGNED:
[6] Similarly REFERS the application for leave to intervene in the course of the appeal proceedings to the panel of three judges, who may hear a motion to dismiss the appeal and the motion de bene esse for leave to appeal.
|
|
mark schrager, J.A. |
AVIS :
Le lecteur doit s'assurer que les décisions consultées sont finales et sans
appel; la consultation
du plumitif s'avère une précaution utile.