Jiang v. Peoples Trust Company

Jiang v. Peoples Trust Company

The chambers judge correctly held the pleading met the low s.4(1)(a) threshold (claim not bound to fail) but erred in finally deciding the statutory interpretation issue at certification; the chambers judge also erred in principle by treating the presence of individual inquiries about consumer purpose as fatal to the identifiable class requirement under s.4(1)(b). A class defined to track the BPCPA's statutory language (including "primarily personal, family or household" qualifier) is objectively definable; the certification application must be remitted to the chambers judge to determine the remaining certification requirements, management and preferability issues.

Citation
2017 BCCA 119
Parties
Appellant (plaintiff): Ying Jiang; Respondent (defendant): Peoples Trust Company; Respondent (defendant): Peoples Card Services Limited Partnership; Respondent (defendant): Peoples Card Services Ltd.; Respondent (defendant): Vancouver City Savings Credit Union; Respondent (defendant): Citizens Bank of Canada; Respondent (defendant): Amex Bank of Canada; Respondent (defendant): All Trans Financial Services Credit Union Limited
Court
British Columbia Court of Appeal
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
17 March 2017
Procedural Posture
Class Action Certification Appeal / Appeal From Supreme Court of British Columbia Order Denying Certification (chambers Decision)
Outcome
Appeal allowed in part; chambers judge's conclusion that class was not objectively identifiable set aside; matter remitted to chambers judge for consideration of remaining certification requirements and amendment of class definition to track statutory language; no costs awarded under s.37 CPA
Legal Topics
Certification, Identifiable Class, Cause of Action, Preferable Procedure, Business Practices and Consumer Protection Act, Prepaid Purchase Cards, Definition of Consumer
Source Language
English
Class Actions Consumer Protection Law Statutory Interpretation Civil Procedure Administrative Law Certification Identifiable Class Cause of Action +4 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 20 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 4
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Ying Jiang

Appellant (plaintiff)

Peoples Trust Company

Respondent (defendant)

Peoples Card Services Limited Partnership

Respondent (defendant)

Peoples Card Services Ltd.

Respondent (defendant)

Vancouver City Savings Credit Union

Respondent (defendant)

Citizens Bank of Canada

Respondent (defendant)

Amex Bank of Canada

Respondent (defendant)

All Trans Financial Services Credit Union Limited

Respondent (defendant)

Procedural Posture

Class Action Certification Appeal / Appeal From Supreme Court of British Columbia Order Denying Certification (chambers Decision)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the pleadings disclose a cause of action under s.4(1)(a) of the CPA by treating defendants' general use prepaid cards as "prepaid purchase cards" under the BPCPA
  2. 2 Whether the proposed class is identifiable under s.4(1)(b) of the CPA and whether use of the term "consumer" renders the class definition impermissibly subjective
  3. 3 Whether the chambers judge improperly finally decided a statutory interpretation issue at the certification stage

Ratio Decidendi

The chambers judge correctly held the pleading met the low s.4(1)(a) threshold (claim not bound to fail) but erred in finally deciding the statutory interpretation issue at certification; the chambers judge also erred in principle by treating the presence of individual inquiries about consumer purpose as fatal to the identifiable class requirement under s.4(1)(b). A class defined to track the BPCPA's statutory language (including "primarily personal, family or household" qualifier) is objectively definable; the certification application must be remitted to the chambers judge to determine the remaining certification requirements, management and preferability issues.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed in part; chambers judge's conclusion that class was not objectively identifiable set aside; matter remitted to chambers judge for consideration of remaining certification requirements and amendment of class definition to track statutory language; no costs awarded under s.37 CPA

Orders

  • Appeal allowed in part
  • Chambers judge's finding that the proposed class could not be objectively identified is set aside