The applicant does not indicate a credible basis upon which to doubt the correctness of the motion judge's assessment that a class action is preferable. The motion judge, as an experienced class action judge, turned his mind to this and reached a reasoned decision on this issue, at paras. 13-14: In my view, the adjudication of the proposed common issues will meaningfully advance this litigation whatever its outcome. If the defendants are found to have met the standard of care, then that finding will be dispositive of the entire litigation as in Andersen v. St. Jude. And if the defendants breached the standard of care, then a class action with the trial judge utilizing the wide-ranging judicial powers provided under s. 25 of the CPA is the preferred procedural vehicle to manage and determine any subsequent individualized damage assessments. I note that, in principle, the common issues that are proposed herein are not materially different from other medical products class actions that have been certified.  Therefore, assuming that the proposed common issues are certified there is at least some evidence of preferability and frankly, little chance that any procedure other than a class action could be shown to be more preferable. Thus, as I have already noted, the only real issue on this motion for certification is commonality under s. 5(1)(c).
"The most advanced legal research software ever built."
The above passage should not be considered legal advice. Reliable answers to complex legal questions require comprehensive research memos. To learn more visit www.alexi.com.