BC Court of Appeal rejects Ontario mutual fund's standing for class action in BC

The fund has business connections in BC, but these were insufficient to establish residency: court

BC Court of Appeal rejects Ontario mutual fund's standing for class action in BC

The BC Court of Appeal upheld a decision denying an Ontario-based mutual fund standing to initiate a class action in British Columbia, affirming that the fund did not meet the residency requirements specified in the Class Proceedings Act.

The appeal in MM Fund v. Excelsior Mining Corp., 2024 BCCA 163 centered on whether MM Fund, a Toronto-based mutual fund, could qualify as a resident of BC to bring a class action lawsuit against Excelsior Mining Corp. and its executives.

In its initial filing, MM Fund claimed that Excelsior Mining Corp. made false representations in a prospectus, violating the Securities Act. The mutual fund sought to certify the lawsuit as a class action, alleging damages due to misrepresentations regarding Excelsior’s copper mine project. However, Excelsior argued that MM Fund did not have standing under the Class Proceedings Act because it was not a BC resident.

The trial judge concluded that MM Fund did not qualify as a BC resident because its operations and central management were conducted entirely from Ontario. The judge applied the central management and control test to determine MM's residency, concluding that the fund was based in Ontario and had no physical office or presence in BC. Consequently, the court ordered MM to amend its pleadings to proceed with an individual action rather than a class action.

MM Fund challenged this decision, arguing that it had substantial ties to BC because it was a reporting issuer under the Securities Act, sold its units through BC dealers, and had irrevocably attorned to the jurisdiction of BC courts. It also claimed that the trial judge erred by applying an overly narrow interpretation of the term "resident."

In its decision, the BC Court of Appeal determined that the trial judge correctly applied the central management and control test, a standard endorsed by the Supreme Court of Canada. The appellate court recognized that while MM Fund is a reporting issuer with business connections in BC, these links were insufficient to establish residency.

The appellate court emphasized that standing under the Class Proceedings Act is intended to limit who can bring class actions to members of the public served by the BC courts. The court agreed that MM Fund did not have the requisite connection to BC to qualify as a resident and dismissed its appeal.

Recent articles & video

SCC confirms manslaughter convictions in case about proper jury instructions on causation

Law firm associate attrition continues to decline, NALP Foundation study shows

How systemizing law firm work allocation enhances diversity efforts and overcomes affinity bias

Dentons advises Saturn on $600 million acquisition of Saskatchewan oil assets

Ontario Court of Appeal upholds anesthesiologist’s liability in severe birth complications case

BC Supreme Court assigns liability in rear-end vehicle collision at Surrey intersection

Most Read Articles

BC Supreme Court rules for equal asset division in Port Alberni property dispute

BC Supreme Court rules vehicle owner and driver liable for 2011 Chilliwack collision

BC Supreme Court upholds solicitor-client privilege in medical negligence case

Petition to remove estate executor does not amount to ‘reprehensible conduct:’ BC Supreme Court