Merlo v. Canada

Merlo v. Canada

The Court found the settlement, including significant non-monetary remedies, a confidential non-adversarial claims process, broad class definition and compensation scheme, the waiver of defendant defences and limitation barriers, the support of experienced counsel and neutral experts, and minimal objections together demonstrate the settlement is fair, reasonable and in the best interests of the class; accordingly the Court approved the settlement, the notice plan and assessor, relief from Rule 334.21(2) for the representative plaintiffs, honoraria of $15,000 each, and class counsel fees and disbursements as ordered.

Citation
2017 FC 533
Parties
Representative Plaintiff: Janet Merlo; Representative Plaintiff: Linda Gillis Davidson; Defendant: Her Majesty the Queen (Canada)
Court
Federal Court
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
30 May 2017
Procedural Posture
Class Action Settlement Approval / Settlement Approval Hearing/motion
Outcome
Settlement approved; orders issued implementing settlement terms, appointing assessor, approving fees and honoraria and releasing claims as detailed below
Legal Topics
Gender Based Harassment, Sexual Orientation Discrimination, Settlement Approval, Class Certification, Compensation and Assessment Process
Source Language
English
Class Actions Employment Law Human Rights Administrative Law Gender Based Harassment Sexual Orientation Discrimination Settlement Approval Class Certification +1 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 27 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 5
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Janet Merlo

Representative Plaintiff

Linda Gillis Davidson

Representative Plaintiff

Her Majesty the Queen (Canada)

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Class Action Settlement Approval / Settlement Approval Hearing/motion

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the proposed settlement is fair, reasonable and in the best interests of the class
  2. 2 Approval of Notice Plan and appointment of Assessor
  3. 3 Relief from Federal Court Rule 334.21(2) for representative plaintiffs

Ratio Decidendi

The Court found the settlement, including significant non-monetary remedies, a confidential non-adversarial claims process, broad class definition and compensation scheme, the waiver of defendant defences and limitation barriers, the support of experienced counsel and neutral experts, and minimal objections together demonstrate the settlement is fair, reasonable and in the best interests of the class; accordingly the Court approved the settlement, the notice plan and assessor, relief from Rule 334.21(2) for the representative plaintiffs, honoraria of $15,000 each, and class counsel fees and disbursements as ordered.

Court Disposition

Settlement approved; orders issued implementing settlement terms, appointing assessor, approving fees and honoraria and releasing claims as detailed below

Orders

  • The Settlement Agreement (with Schedules and Appendices) is fair, reasonable and in the best interests of Class Members and is approved (Order 1).
  • The Settlement and Order bind all Class Members who did not opt out by March 29, 2017 (Order 2).