In the case of Massie v Provincial Health Services Authority, dated July 25, 2023, Brigitte Cleroux, who was alleged to be an unlicensed nurse, was estimated to have been involved directly or indirectly in providing nursing care to approximately 1,150 patients attending gynecological surgical procedures at BC Women’s Hospital and Health Centre (the "BCWH"). One of these patients, plaintiff Miranda Massie, applied to certify an action as a class proceeding against the defendant Provincial Health Services Authority (the "PHSA") for legal claims arising from Ms. Cleroux's involvement in patient care (referred to as "treatments") while at BCWH. The claims included negligence, battery, breach of privacy, vicarious liability, and sought damages, including aggregate and punitive damages. For claims related to negligence and battery against the PHSA, individual trials would likely be necessary to prove causation of damage and compensable harm for each proposed class member. This requirement of individual trials detracted from the commonality of significant issues associated with such claims, making a class action on those claims not preferable. However, for the claim of breach of privacy and the PHSA's alleged vicarious liability, along with punitive damages, the court found common issues and determined that a class action was a preferable procedure for their prosecution. As a result, the court certified this action as a class action for a subset of the claims and issues advanced by the plaintiff, including breach of privacy and related vicarious liability, and punitive damages.