Court turfs product liability suits against government

November 2008
CMAJ: Canadian Medical Association Journal;11/4/2008, Vol. 179 Issue 10, p998
Academic Journal
The article reports on the decision of Ontario Court of Appeal in rejecting a class-action lawsuit brought on behalf of an approximated 29, 500 Canadian women who received Dow Corning silicone breast implants between 1962 and 1992. According to the decision, the federal government owes no "duty of care" to individual Canadians in its regulation of medical devices. Thus, it cannot be held liable for harm resulting from their use.


Related Articles

  • Ontario Court of Appeal recognizes your right to sue for invasion of privacy. Wachowicz, Ian L. // Edmontonians;Mar2012, Vol. 23 Issue 1, p29 

    The article discusses a court case Jones vs. Tsige which deals with invasion of privacy. The Ontario Court of Appeal examined the case and reviewed the Canadian common law and statutes and Commonwealth jurisprudence. The court then discussed the causes, limitations and impact of these actions....

  • Canadian Appeals Court Upholds British Judgement.  // Corporate Legal Times;Dec2001, Vol. 11 Issue 121, pBWB10 

    Focuses on the decision of the Court of Appeals on the case of The Society of Lloyd's versus Meinzer in Ontario. Enforcement of the 1996 settlement of Lloyd's with its investors; Accounts on the previous ruling of the British Court; Details on the business losses suffered by Lloyd's.

  • Legality of stumpage fee decided by fall. Ross, Ian // Northern Ontario Business;Jul2008, Vol. 28 Issue 9, p28 

    The article reports that the decision of the legitimacy of the Residual Value Charge will be heard at the Ontario Court of Appeal on September 2, 2008 in Toronto. It states that on that date, the ongoing fight of Sault Ste. Marie hardwood mill operator Jim Boniferro to repeal a Crown stumpage...

  • EXTRADITION.  // International Law Update;Oct2007, Vol. 13, p194 

    The article reports on the lawsuit involving extradition. On appeal from judgments of extradition and surrender by Canada to the U.S. by one of the three individuals charged with operating fraudulent cross-border telemarketing scheme to the U.S. citizens, Ontario Court of Appeals dismisses...

  • Judge slams ADR, rules class action can proceed. Barnslev, Paul // Ontario Birchbark;Dec2004/Jan2005, Vol. 3 Issue 11, p1 

    The article reports on the slamming of alternative dispute resolution (ADR) process of the federal government, by a panel of three Ontario appellate court judges. While ruling that a lawsuit launched by former Ontario residential school students could proceed as a class action, a panel of three...

  • Claims.  // Canadian Underwriter;May2009, Vol. 76 Issue 5, p8 

    The article discusses a court case wherein the Ontario Court of Appeal upheld the jury award of Cdn$17 million in an automobile injury and Cdn$13.9 million for the cost of future care in Marcoccia v. Ford Credit Canada Ltd. In another court case, the Ontario Superior Court ruled that auto...

  • Protected Statements. Melnitzer, Julius // InsideCounsel;Mar2006, Vol. 16 Issue 172, p36 

    Discusses the decision made by the Ontario Court of Appeal on December 15, 2005 to lower the plaintiffs' bar for corporate disclosures by reversing the ruling by Superior Court Justice Sidney Lederman in the case Kerr v. Danier. Opportunity for purchasers of shares to claim damages under...

  • Court of Appeal Upholds Finding of Plan Member Entitlement to Surplus on Plan Wind-Up. Godkewitsch, Clio M. // Plans & Trusts;Mar/Apr2012, Vol. 30 Issue 2, p15 

    The article discusses a court case wherein the plaintiff has appealed the right of Hudson's Bay Co. (HBC) to credit a surplus on the defined contribution component of pension plan. Court of Appeal for Ontario has upheld the decision of the trial for the cross appeal on the case. It adds that a...

  • Members Cannot Compel a Partial Plan Termination, Directly or Indirectly. Godkewitsch, Clio M. // Plans & Trusts;Sep/Oct2012, Vol. 30 Issue 5, p16 

    The article discusses the Lacroix v. Canada Mortgage and Housing Corp. case. The case involves an issue concerning the power of a court to require an employer to wind up partially its award damages or pension plan. The Ontario Court of Appeal denied the certification of the issues with regards...


Read the Article


Sorry, but this item is not currently available from your library.

Try another library?
Sign out of this library

Other Topics