Since it was issued two decades ago, the Ontario Law Reform Commission’s Report on Class Actions has been the foundational document for any discussion of the Canadian class action. Judges and commentators regularly cite the three goals or benefits of class actions that were outlined in that report, namely, improved judicial economy, behaviour modification, and improved access to justice. However, the Report necessarily relied largely on data from foreign jurisdictions to support its findings, and virtually no studies have tested whether or not these goals are being met by the Canadian class action. The author undertakes a critical analysis of the goals as stated by the Report on Class Actions and uncovers areas of conceptual and potential practical weakness. This analysis suggests some viable starting points for future studies of class actions that can validate and improve their usefulness in Canadian society. Ultimately, the author concludes that the continued assumption by the courts that these three goals are being forwarded may be correct, but is not justified by existing data. The fact that many valid criticisms have been raised suggests that studies of Canadian class actions and their results should be undertaken to ensure that the class action maintains a useful and beneficial role in Canada.
Brian Smith (Sat,) studied this question.