stats
globeinteractive.com: Making the Business of Life Easier

   Finance globeinvestor   Careers globecareers.workopolis Subscribe to The Globe
The Globe and Mail /globeandmail.com
Home | Business | National | Int'l | Sports | Columnists | The Arts | Tech | Travel | TV | Wheels
space


Search

space
  This site         Tips

  
space
  The Web Google
space
   space



space

  Where to Find It


Breaking News
  Home Page

  Report on Business

  Sports

  Technology

space
Subscribe to The Globe

Shop at our Globe Store


Print Edition
  Front Page

  Report on Business

  National

  International

  Sports

  Arts & Entertainment

  Editorials

  Columnists

   Headline Index

 Other Sections
  Appointments

  Births & Deaths

  Books

  Classifieds

  Comment

  Education

  Environment

  Facts & Arguments

  Focus

  Health

  Obituaries

  Real Estate

  Review

  Science

  Style

  Technology

  Travel

  Wheels

 Leisure
  Cartoon

  Crosswords

  Food & Dining

  Golf

  Horoscopes

  Movies

  Online Personals

  TV Listings/News

 Specials & Series
  All Reports...

space

Services
   Where to Find It
 A quick guide to what's available on the site

 Newspaper
  Advertise

  Corrections

  Customer Service

  Help & Contact Us

  Reprints

  Subscriptions

 Web Site
  Advertise

  E-Mail Newsletters

  Free Headlines

  Globe Store New

  Help & Contact Us

  Make Us Home

  Mobile New

  Press Room

  Privacy Policy

  Terms & Conditions


GiveLife.ca

    

PRINT EDITION
Top court to hear Mr. Sub case that may extend liability limits
space
space
By CHRISTINE DOBBY
  
  

Email this article Print this article
Tuesday, October 15, 2019 – Page B1

Canada's top court is set to hear an appeal Tuesday in a class-action lawsuit by Mr. Sub franchisees seeking compensation from Maple Leaf Foods Inc. for loss of sales and reputational damage during the 2008 listeriosis crisis, a case lawyers say could significantly increase financial liability for manufacturers of almost any product.

The case before the Supreme Court of Canada raises a thorny issue in tort law, the body of law that deals with civil negligence.

Most tort claims involve compensation for some sort of injury or damage to property, but the case against Maple Leaf asks the court to consider whether to impose responsibility purely for financial losses.

"The question that keeps popping up in case after case after case is, what if you're negligent but you don't cause physical harm to someone, you just cost them money?" said Andrew Bernstein, a litigation partner at Torys LLP, calling it an issue that "continues to bedevil the courts."

The "broader implications of the case are very significant," he said, noting it raises the "spectre of indeterminate liability."

"I think the concern you would have is that anybody who supplies anything that's used in another business could face potential liability."

In 2008, an outbreak of listeria bacteria at a Maple Leaf processing plant led to the deaths of more than 20 people and serious illness among almost dozens more.

The company issued a national recall of many of its ready-to-eat products, which include items such as smoked deli meats. Within months, Maple Leaf agreed to settle a series of proposed classaction lawsuits by victims of the outbreak and the company has received praise for quickly accepting responsibility for the crisis.

But the claims of a representative plaintiff and 424 Mr. Sub franchisees have remained unresolved.

Maple Leaf had a partnership agreement with the chain owner, Mr. Submarine Ltd., but had no direct or contractual relationship with the franchisees themselves.

The franchise owners were required to purchase and sell meats approved by Mr. Sub, which included two Maple Leaf products - roast beef and corned beef - that were affected by the recall.

Mr. Sub became publicly associated with Maple Leaf during the crisis when the Canadian Food Inspection Agency named the chain in a health warning and it was referenced in media reports.

Consumers asked retailers if their meat products were affected and competitors posted signs proclaiming they did not serve Maple Leaf meats. Other restaurants, including McDonald's, were also linked to Maple Leaf at the time.

The franchisees ultimately launched a class-action lawsuit, claiming the outbreak caused a "loss of customer confidence, loss of market share, and consequential economic losses in the form of lost profits and business interruption losses."

On a motion regarding the issue of liability, a judge of the Ontario Superior Court of Justice found in favour of the franchisees in 2016. The Ontario Court of Appeal overturned that ruling in 2018, stating Maple Leaf did not owe the franchisees a duty of care for "economic losses arising from reputational harm." The Supreme Court agreed to hear an appeal to the decision earlier this year. The case before the Supreme Court does not deal with costs to replace recalled meats or clean-up expenses.

In a written submission, Maple Leaf suggests a ruling in favour of the franchisees could pose a risk to public health or safety by imposing a disincentive on manufacturers to issue quick and broad recalls of dangerous products. The filing said manufacturers "should be encouraged to recall products which pose a risk of harm, without the threat that those very actions could expose them to liability for protecting against potential reputational harm and economic losses of those who distribute, supply, or sell the products."

The franchisees counter in their own filing that there are regulatory requirements around when manufacturers must recall products and that "public policy favours imposing a duty to increase accountability and public safety." They argue, "the franchisees were in a vulnerable position, with no ability to protect themselves contractually against Maple Leaf or Mr. Sub regarding Maple Leaf's negligent supply of shoddy products. Tort law provides the only available remedy to the franchisees and the only means of holding Maple Leaf accountable for causing reasonably foreseeable economic losses."

"Everyone in the product liability area, both plaintiff and defence counsel, will be watching this case closely," said Teresa Dufort, a partner and co-leader of the product liability defence practice group at McMillan LLP.

"The Supreme Court of Canada doesn't wade into the commercial realm very often, so this is a sit-up-and-takenotice moment for companies that make consumer products, tort lawyers and businesses generally," Ms. Dufort said.

"If the court opens things up and says from now on, there will be recovery in tort for economic loss, that will have huge repercussions, especially in consumer-oriented product liability class action cases," she said, noting that it could extend liability beyond products that are actually dangerous to products that are simply "shoddy" or badly made.

Ms. Dufort said businesses need clarity and predictability on the legal risks they face. "The entire issue of what happens around the boundaries for economic loss will be very important for anyone who's in the consumer product business."

Lawyers for both Maple Leaf and the Mr. Sub franchisees declined to comment in the days ahead of the court hearing.

The Supreme Court typically takes about six months after an appeal is heard to deliver a ruling.


Huh? How did I get here?
Return to Main Johanna_Schneller Page
Subscribe to
The Globe and Mail
 

Email this article Print this article

space  Advertisement
space

Need CPR for your RSP? Check your portfolio’s pulse and lower yours by improving the overall health of your investments. Click here.

Advertisement

7-Day Site Search
    

Breaking News



Today's Weather


Inside

Rick Salutin
Merrily marching
off to war
Roy MacGregor
Duct tape might hold
when panic strikes


Editorial
Where Manley is going with his first budget




space

Columnists



For a columnist's most recent stories, click on their name below.

 National


Roy MacGregor arrow
This Country
space
Jeffrey Simpson arrow
The Nation
space
Margaret Wente arrow
Counterpoint
space
Hugh Winsor  arrow
The Power Game
space
 Business


Rob Carrick arrow
Personal Finance
space
Drew Fagan arrow
The Big Picture
space
Mathew Ingram arrow
space
Brent Jang arrow
Business West
space
Brian Milner arrow
Taking Stock
space
Eric Reguly arrow
To The Point
space
Andrew Willis arrow
Streetwise
space
 Sports


Stephen Brunt arrow
The Game
space
Eric Duhatschek arrow
space
Allan Maki arrow
space
William Houston arrow
Truth & Rumours
space
Lorne Rubenstein arrow
Golf
space
 The Arts


John Doyle arrow
Television
space
John MacLachlan Gray arrow
Gray's Anatomy
space
David Macfarlane arrow
Cheap Seats
space
Johanna Schneller arrow
Moviegoer
space
 Comment


Murray Campbell arrow
Ontario Politics
space
Lysiane Gagnon arrow
Inside Quebec
space
Marcus Gee arrow
The World
space
William Johnson arrow
Pit Bill
space
Paul Knox arrow
Worldbeat
space
Heather Mallick arrow
As If
space
Leah McLaren arrow
Generation Why
space
Rex Murphy arrow
Japes of Wrath
space
Rick Salutin arrow
On The Other Hand
space
Paul Sullivan arrow
The West
space
William Thorsell arrow
space





Home | Business | National | Int'l | Sports | Columnists | The Arts | Tech | Travel | TV | Wheels
space

© 2003 Bell Globemedia Interactive Inc. All Rights Reserved.
Help & Contact Us | Back to the top of this page