Dixon v. Stork Craft Manufacturing Inc.

Dixon v. Stork Craft Manufacturing Inc.

The Dixon Action is a mirror image of the earlier Dodd Action and, on the evidence, was commenced to relitigate issues already decided, to circumvent the appeal of the June 16, 2011 order and to improperly toll limitation periods; consolidation would permit amendment of pleadings and addition of representative plaintiffs by collateral means; therefore the action is plainly vexatious and an abuse of process and must be stayed.

Citation
2013 BCSC 1117
Parties
Plaintiff/respondent: Jane Dixon; Plaintiff/respondent: Dana Miller; Plaintiff/respondent: Loretta McFadzean; Plaintiff/respondent: Lisa Elliot; Defendant/applicant: Stork Craft Manufacturing Inc.; Defendant/applicant: Fisher-Price Inc.; Defendant/applicant: Sears Canada Inc.; Defendant/applicant: Wal-Mart Canada Corporation; Defendant/applicant: Toys "R" Us (Canada) Ltd / Toys "R" Us (Canada) Ltée
Court
Supreme Court of British Columbia
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
21 June 2013
Procedural Posture
Class Action; Product Liability and Consumer Protection / Application Under Rule 9 5 to Stay or Strike; Interlocutory Decision
Outcome
Dixon Action stayed as vexatious and an abuse of process
Legal Topics
Abuse of Process, Vexatious Litigation, Consolidation of Actions, Limitation Periods, Certification, Settlement Agreement Enforcement
Source Language
English
Civil Procedure Class Actions Product Liability Consumer Protection Equity and Remedies Abuse of Process Vexatious Litigation Consolidation of Actions +3 more

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Legal principles 5 Authorities cited 9 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Jane Dixon

Plaintiff/respondent

Dana Miller

Plaintiff/respondent

Loretta McFadzean

Plaintiff/respondent

Lisa Elliot

Plaintiff/respondent

Stork Craft Manufacturing Inc.

Defendant/applicant

Fisher-Price Inc.

Defendant/applicant

Sears Canada Inc.

Defendant/applicant

Wal-Mart Canada Corporation

Defendant/applicant

Toys "R" Us (Canada) Ltd / Toys "R" Us (Canada) Ltée

Defendant/applicant

Procedural Posture

Class Action; Product Liability and Consumer Protection / Application Under Rule 9 5 to Stay or Strike; Interlocutory Decision

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Dixon Action is vexatious or an abuse of process
  2. 2 Whether the Dixon Action impermissibly re-litigates the addition of representative plaintiffs to the Dodd Action
  3. 3 Whether the Dixon Action seeks to circumvent the appeal of the June 16, 2011 order

Ratio Decidendi

The Dixon Action is a mirror image of the earlier Dodd Action and, on the evidence, was commenced to relitigate issues already decided, to circumvent the appeal of the June 16, 2011 order and to improperly toll limitation periods; consolidation would permit amendment of pleadings and addition of representative plaintiffs by collateral means; therefore the action is plainly vexatious and an abuse of process and must be stayed.

Court Disposition

Dixon Action stayed as vexatious and an abuse of process

Orders

  • The plaintiffs' action is stayed
  • Defendants are awarded costs