G.G. v. Ontario

G.G. v. Ontario

The court granted leave to intervene to the Class Action Clinic and Women of Class and granted limited interventions to the Ontario Chamber of Commerce and the Canadian Civil Liberties Association because the continued application of the Ragoonanan principle transcends the immediate parties and the proposed...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
2026 ONCA 164
Parties
Plaintiff (appellant/respondent): G.G.; Plaintiff (appellant/respondent): W.W.; Defendant (respondent/appellant): His Majesty the King in Right of the Province of Ontario; Defendants (respondents): Children's Aid Societies (49 CASs across Ontario)
Court
Court of Appeal for Ontario
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
4 March 2026
Procedural Posture
Class Proceeding (certification Appeals) / Appeal Perfected; Motions to Intervene Decided in Advance of Hearing (hearing Scheduled April 13, 2026)
Outcome
Motions to intervene granted in part: Clinic and WOC granted full intervention; Chamber of Commerce and CCLA granted intervention on limited issues; CCLA barred from raising public interest standing as representative plaintiff; intervention terms imposed.
Legal Topics
Class Certification, Intervention, Ragoonanan Principle, Access to Justice, Public Interest Standing, Stare Decisis
Source Language
english
Civil Class Actions Procedural Law Class Certification Intervention Ragoonanan Principle Access to Justice Public Interest Standing +1 more

Source-derived case record

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Legal principles 6 Authorities cited 14 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 4
Sign in to unlock

Parties

G.G.

Plaintiff (appellant/respondent)

W.W.

Plaintiff (appellant/respondent)

His Majesty the King in Right of the Province of Ontario

Defendant (respondent/appellant)

Children's Aid Societies (49 CASs across Ontario)

Defendants (respondents)

Procedural Posture

Class Proceeding (certification Appeals) / Appeal Perfected; Motions to Intervene Decided in Advance of Hearing (hearing Scheduled April 13, 2026)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Ragoonanan principle should continue to be applied in Ontario class proceedings
  2. 2 Whether proposed intervenors should be granted leave to intervene and on what terms
  3. 3 Whether the Ragoonanan principle flows from the Class Proceedings Act and Rules of Civil Procedure or conflicts with access to justice principles

Ratio Decidendi

The court granted leave to intervene to the Class Action Clinic and Women of Class and granted limited interventions to the Ontario Chamber of Commerce and the Canadian Civil Liberties Association because the continued application of the Ragoonanan principle transcends the immediate parties and the proposed intervenors would likely make useful, non-duplicative contributions; the CCLA was precluded from raising a new issue about public interest standing serving as representative plaintiff because that issue would expand the scope of the appeal; all intervenors were subject to strict limits (no record supplementation, ten-page factum by March 12, 2026, five-page replies by March 23, 2026,...

Court Disposition

Motions to intervene granted in part: Clinic and WOC granted full intervention; Chamber of Commerce and CCLA granted intervention on limited issues; CCLA barred from raising public interest standing as representative plaintiff; intervention terms imposed.

Orders

  • Each intervener shall take the record as filed and shall not supplement the record
  • Each intervener may serve and file a factum of no more than ten pages by March 12, 2026