Connect with us
[bsa_pro_ad_space id=12]

Alberta

Chris Scott and Rebecca Ingram attempting Class Action Lawsuit against Province for COVID restrictions

Published

17 minute read

Could open the door for business owners across the province to seek damages for financial losses

News release regarding this class action lawsuit from Rath & Company

Rath & Company has launched a class action lawsuit against the Province of Alberta on behalf of business owners in Alberta who faced operational restrictions due to, now deemed illegal, Public Health Orders. This lawsuit follows the recent Ingram Decision by the Calgary Court of King’s Bench, which declared that all of Dr. Hinshaw’s Public Health Orders were ultra vires, in other words illegal or not lawfully enacted. The Ingram Decision has opened the door for affected business owners to seek damages for the financial losses incurred due to the restrictions imposed by these unlawful Public Health Orders.

The lawsuit names Rebecca Ingram and Chris Scott as representative plaintiffs who suffered significant financial harm due to Dr. Hinshaw’s Public Health Orders. On February 7, 2024, the parties attended their first case conference with Justice Feasby of the Court of King’s Bench of Alberta to establish the next steps. The lawyers for the Province of Alberta made it clear that they intend to oppose the class action certification. Premier Smith has yet to comment on the government opposition to compensate individual business owners impacted by Dr. Hinshaw’s unlawful Public Health Orders.

“This marks the first of many procedural and substantive steps. This is an important case about
government actions and overreach during a time when business owners were unlawfully mandated to close their businesses at moments notice. It will give Albertans the opportunity to hold the Alberta government accountable and seek fair compensation on behalf of the many businesses impacted by Deena Hinshaw’s many unlawful decisions,” said lead counsel Jeffrey Rath.

The class action represents all impacted Alberta business owners. If you have been adversely affected and wish to join this class action lawsuit, please register by completing the online form at Business Class Action – Rath&Company (rathandcompany.com). Should the Court grant permission for this action to proceed as a “Class Action” (also known as “Certification”), you may qualify as a class member whether or not you have registered.

“In what world is it fair for small business owners to bear the financial brunt for the benefit of the entire province? Our hope is that this lawsuit brings justice to the affected business owners who suffered significant hardship and losses without justification or consideration by the province’s harsh and unilateral actions,” Mr. Rath continued.

From Rath & Company

Business Class Action Update – October 1, 2021

The Certification Hearing scheduled with Justice Feasby will be available for online viewing. Below are the details you need to join the session:

Date and Time:

  • October 2 and 3, 2024, at 10:00 AM (Mountain Time, UTC-06:00)

Join Online:

Join by Phone:

  • Dial-In Number: +1-780-851-3573 (Canada Toll – Edmonton)
  • Access Code: 277 254 26969

PLEASE NOTE – Recording or rebroadcasting of this hearing is strictly prohibited.

Documents related to this matter that have been filed to date are available for viewing online – see links BELOW.

We encourage all interested parties to observe the proceedings.

Summary of the Covid Business Restrictions Class Action Lawsuit

Rath & Company has commenced a Class Action lawsuit against the provincial government of Alberta on behalf of business owners who faced operational restrictions due to Public Health Orders during the COVID-19 pandemic. This lawsuit aims to secure financial compensation for businesses in Alberta that were either fully or partially restricted by these health orders.

The legal foundation of this case is anchored in the recent Ingram decision by the Calgary Court of King’s Bench, which determined that the Public Health Orders were not enacted lawfully.

The primary plaintiffs in this lawsuit are two Alberta business owners who suffered considerable financial losses due to the imposed Public Health Orders.

This legal action represents an opportunity for business owners who were operational in Alberta from 2020 to 2022 and were impacted by these health directives.

If you are among those affected and are interested in joining this class action lawsuit as a member of the group, we invite you to register with us. To do so, please complete our intake form.

This is an intake form for use by our legal team. Information provided in this form will be used to assist us in moving the Class Action case forward.

If the Court permits the action to proceed as a “Class Action” (this is called “Certification”), you may be a Class Member. You will receive a notice if the action is Certified that will explain your rights as a Class Member.

Please Complete this Form to the best of your ability and it will be sent directly to: [email protected]

 

To Review the Class Action Documents Click Here:

  • Notice of Application
  • Business Class Action Statement of Claim
  • Business Class Action Plaintiffs Brief
  • Business Class Action Provinces Brief
  • Business Class Action Plaintiffs Reply
  • Affidavit of Rebecca Ingram
  • Affidavit of Christopher Scott
  • Affidavit of Dana Hogemann – Senior
  • Assistant Deputy Minister, Treasury Board Secretariat
  • Affidavit of Andy Ridge – Incident Commander of the Emergency Operations Centre with the Ministry of Health
  • Affidavit and Expert Report of Randy Popik – Chartered Accountant at Kingston Ross Pasnak LLP
  • Affidavit and Expert Report of Christopher Cotton – Professor of Economics at Queen’s University
  • Scott Transcript
  • Ridge Undertaking
  • Ridge Transcript
  • Cotton Undertaking
  • Cotton Transcript
  • Popik Undertaking
  • Popik Transcript
  • Ingram Transcript
  • Eberle-Morris Transcript
  • Hogemann Transcript
  •  Ingram Decision

Covid Business Losses Class Action Intake Form

0 / 400

Thank you for your participation. Your assistance is greatly appreciated.

Business Class Action Update – October 1, 2024

The Certification Hearing scheduled with Justice Feasby will be available for online viewing. Below are the details you need to join the session:

Date and Time:

  • October 2 and 3, 2024, at 10:00 AM (Mountain Time, UTC-06:00)

Join Online:

Join by Phone:

  • Dial-In Number: +1-780-851-3573 (Canada Toll – Edmonton)
  • Access Code: 277 254 26969

PLEASE NOTE – Recording or rebroadcasting of this hearing is strictly prohibited.

Business Class Action Update – June 21, 2024

The government of Alberta has taken the position of opposing the certification of our proposed class action. As a result, we must go to court to get the lawsuit “certified” as a class action – this is known as the certification hearing.

The certification hearing is scheduled for October 2 and 3, 2024, before Justice Feasby. The following schedule has been agreed to leading up to the certification hearing:

We have uploaded the Plaintiffs Notice of Application and evidence in support as well as the government of Alberta’s evidence on our website. Specifically, on the website you can now find the:

Frequently Asked Questions

What is a Class Action Lawsuit?
A class action lawsuit is a legal action where a group of people collectively brings a claim to court. This type of lawsuit is distinct from individual cases, as it represents the interests and seeks compensation for a class of people who have been affected by similar acts of negligence or harmful practices. Class-action suits provide a more comprehensive approach to addressing widespread issues, allowing for a collective voice in legal proceedings. These lawsuits can be instrumental in achieving justice for a larger group and can potentially set precedents for future legal and protective standards.
What is certification?

The court must first assess whether the claim should be advanced in the form of a class action. The court will consider whether the claim shows an appropriate cause of action, an identifiable class of persons, and issues that are shared in common. The court will also determine whether a class action is a preferable procedure, and whether there is an appropriate representative plaintiff. If the class action is certified by the court, the representative plaintiff or plaintiffs will advance the case on behalf of all class members.

Am I a class member?

When a class action is certified, a definition of the class is provided. If you are an individual class member meeting the class description, then you do not need to sign up to be part of the class action – you are automatically included.

If you owned or operated a business in Alberta from 2020-2022 and wish to register with us as a member of the group, please fill out the intake form.
Do I have to pay to be part of the class action?
No. This class action will proceed on a contingency fee basis.  This means that the lawyers bringing the action will only be paid if the class action succeeds. If successful, the lawyers will be paid a portion of the settlement or judgment, but only if the Court approves.

Todayville is a digital media and technology company. We profile unique stories and events in our community. Register and promote your community event for free.

Follow Author

Alberta

The beauty of economic corridors: Inside Alberta’s work to link products with new markets

Published on

From the Canadian Energy Centre

Q&A with Devin Dreeshen, Minister of Transport and Economic Corridors

Devin Dreeshen, Alberta’s Minister of Transportation
and Economic Corridors.

CEC: How have recent developments impacted Alberta’s ability to expand trade routes and access new markets for energy and natural resources?

Dreeshen: With the U.S. trade dispute going on right now, it’s great to see that other provinces and the federal government are taking an interest in our east, west and northern trade routes, something that we in Alberta have been advocating for a long time.

We signed agreements with Saskatchewan and Manitoba to have an economic corridor to stretch across the prairies, as well as a recent agreement with the Northwest Territories to go north. With the leadership of Premier Danielle Smith, she’s been working on a BC, prairie and three northern territories economic corridor agreement with pretty much the entire western and northern block of Canada.

There has been a tremendous amount of work trying to get Alberta products to market and to make sure we can build big projects in Canada again.

CEC: Which infrastructure projects, whether pipeline, rail or port expansions, do you see as the most viable for improving Alberta’s global market access?

Dreeshen: We look at everything. Obviously, pipelines are the safest way to transport oil and gas, but also rail is part of the mix of getting over four million barrels per day to markets around the world.

The beauty of economic corridors is that it’s a swath of land that can have any type of utility in it, whether it be a roadway, railway, pipeline or a utility line. When you have all the environmental permits that are approved in a timely manner, and you have that designated swath of land, it politically de-risks any type of project.

CEC: A key focus of your ministry has been expanding trade corridors, including an agreement with Saskatchewan and Manitoba to explore access to Hudson’s Bay. Is there any interest from industry in developing this corridor further?

Dreeshen: There’s been lots of talk [about] Hudson Bay, a trade corridor with rail and port access. We’ve seen some improvements to go to Churchill, but also an interest in the Nelson River.

We’re starting to see more confidence in the private sector and industry wanting to build these projects. It’s great that governments can get together and work on a common goal to build things here in Canada.

CEC: What is your vision for Alberta’s future as a leader in global trade, and how do economic corridors fit into that strategy?

Dreeshen: Premier Smith has talked about C-69 being repealed by the federal government [and] the reversal of the West Coast tanker ban, which targets Alberta energy going west out of the Pacific.

There’s a lot of work that needs to be done on the federal side. Alberta has been doing a lot of the heavy lifting when it comes to economic corridors.

We’ve asked the federal government if they could develop an economic corridor agency. We want to make sure that the federal government can come to the table, work with provinces [and] work with First Nations across this country to make sure that we can see these projects being built again here in Canada.

Continue Reading

2025 Federal Election

Next federal government should recognize Alberta’s important role in the federation

Published on

From the Fraser Institute

By Tegan Hill

With the tariff war continuing and the federal election underway, Canadians should understand what the last federal government seemingly did not—a strong Alberta makes for a stronger Canada.

And yet, current federal policies disproportionately and negatively impact the province. The list includes Bill C-69 (which imposes complex, uncertain and onerous review requirements on major energy projects), Bill C-48 (which bans large oil tankers off British Columbia’s northern coast and limits access to Asian markets), an arbitrary cap on oil and gas emissions, numerous other “net-zero” targets, and so on.

Meanwhile, Albertans contribute significantly more to federal revenues and national programs than they receive back in spending on transfers and programs including the Canada Pension Plan (CPP) because Alberta has relatively high rates of employment, higher average incomes and a younger population.

For instance, since 1976 Alberta’s employment rate (the number of employed people as a share of the population 15 years of age and over) has averaged 67.4 per cent compared to 59.7 per cent in the rest of Canada, and annual market income (including employment and investment income) has exceeded that in the other provinces by $10,918 (on average).

As a result, Alberta’s total net contribution to federal finances (total federal taxes and payments paid by Albertans minus federal money spent or transferred to Albertans) was $244.6 billion from 2007 to 2022—more than five times as much as the net contribution from British Columbians or Ontarians. That’s a massive outsized contribution given Alberta’s population, which is smaller than B.C. and much smaller than Ontario.

Albertans’ net contribution to the CPP is particularly significant. From 1981 to 2022, Alberta workers contributed 14.4 per cent (on average) of total CPP payments paid to retirees in Canada while retirees in the province received only 10.0 per cent of the payments. Albertans made a cumulative net contribution to the CPP (the difference between total CPP contributions made by Albertans and CPP benefits paid to retirees in Alberta) of $53.6 billion over the period—approximately six times greater than the net contribution of B.C., the only other net contributing province to the CPP. Indeed, only two of the nine provinces that participate in the CPP contribute more in payroll taxes to the program than their residents receive back in benefits.

So what would happen if Alberta withdrew from the CPP?

For starters, the basic CPP contribution rate of 9.9 per cent (typically deducted from our paycheques) for Canadians outside Alberta (excluding Quebec) would have to increase for the program to remain sustainable. For a new standalone plan in Alberta, the rate would likely be lower, with estimates ranging from 5.85 per cent to 8.2 per cent. In other words, based on these estimates, if Alberta withdrew from the CPP, Alberta workers could receive the same retirement benefits but at a lower cost (i.e. lower payroll tax) than other Canadians while the payroll tax would have to increase for the rest of the country while the benefits remained the same.

Finally, despite any claims to the contrary, according to Statistics Canada, Alberta’s demographic advantage, which fuels its outsized contribution to the CPP, will only widen in the years ahead. Alberta will likely maintain relatively high employment rates and continue to welcome workers from across Canada and around the world. And considering Alberta recorded the highest average inflation-adjusted economic growth in Canada since 1981, with Albertans’ inflation-adjusted market income exceeding the average of the other provinces every year since 1971, Albertans will likely continue to pay an outsized portion for the CPP. Of course, the idea for Alberta to withdraw from the CPP and create its own provincial plan isn’t new. In 2001, several notable public figures, including Stephen Harper, wrote the famous Alberta “firewall” letter suggesting the province should take control of its future after being marginalized by the federal government.

The next federal government—whoever that may be—should understand Alberta’s crucial role in the federation. For a stronger Canada, especially during uncertain times, Ottawa should support a strong Alberta including its energy industry.

Continue Reading

Trending

X