Jun 28, 2016
In a recent article in Lexpert Magazine, journalist Julius Melnitzer discusses the Ontario Superior Court’s decision in Bradley v. Eastern Platinum Ltd. which offers practical guidance on the application of the leave test for a securities class action set out by the Supreme Court of Canada in December 2015. According to the judge in Bradley, the high court’s test for leave is more like a motion for summary judgment than a motion to strike and therefore requires judges to weigh the evidence – and not just make a ruling based on the contents of the pleadings. In the article, Kevin O’Brien, a litigation partner at Osler, offers his take on the impact of the decision in which the judge stated that courts must undertake “a robust, meaningful examination and critical evaluation of the evidence” in determining whether the test for leave has been met.
“The upshot is that motions for leave will result in a comprehensive analysis on the merits, forcing parties to lead with their best foot,” Kevin explains. “That’s not to say that the plaintiffs will have to prove their case, but they will have to show a realistic possibility that they will ultimately be successful.”
Read more about the decision in Bradley v. Eastern Platinum Ltd. in Julius Melnitzer’s article “Leave test enforced” in Lexpert Magazine – June Issue 2016 © Thomson Reuters Canada Limited.
Leave test enforced – Lexpert Magazine
Reprinted with permission from Lexpert®, published by Thomson Reuters Canada.