Abstract: This paper examines the changes to Ontario’s Class Proceedings Act resulting from Bill 161 through a Marxist lens, with the aim of understanding class action proceedings as a tool for challenging corporate power by providing access to justice to plaintiffs and behaviour modification incentives for corporations. This paper argues that a class action proceeding is a form of collective action that can act as an effective way to challenge corporate hegemony under Neoliberalism. This essay commences with a brief background on corporate hegemony and Marxist theory, and then moves to an examination of consumer protection and collective rights under Neoliberalism. Finally, the bulk of this essay addresses how class action proceedings can be understood as an excellent tool for combating corporate hegemony and demanding consumer protection in a political and legal landscape that would seek to see vast numbers of plaintiffs denied meaningful redress. By situating this discussion within Marxist theory and a Neoliberal climate, the final section outlines the ways the changes made in Bill 161 not only further the agenda of corporate interests while potentially denying redress to plaintiffs, but also fail to follow the three main objectives of class action proceedings, as iterated by the Supreme Court of Canada.
Rebecca Meharchand (Mon,) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: