Class Actions

Savonitto is involved in many class action files, some of which have had an important impact on the lives of a large number of victims or those who have suffered important damages. Our team is a major player in all the steps of a class action, whether it be the strategy prior to the institution of legal proceedings, the authorization process or the legal actions that will lead to a final resolution of the problem.

Our prominent expertise as plaintiffs’ counsels in class actions has been recognized to the extent that defendants sometimes resort to our tactical and strategic know-how in order to defend themselves against liability procedures.

We have acted in class actions in environmental law, consumer law, health care, sports, securities and insurance.

Active files

  • Guy Daniel v. Procureure générale du Québec

This file pertains to the unusual troubles and inconveniences experienced by residents of St-Jean-sur-Richelieu in connection with Autoroute 35.
S.C. 755-06-000001-160

  • Honhon v. Procureure générale du Canada et al.

This file pertains to the indemnification of people infected with the Hepatitis C virus between 1986 and 1990 in connection with the tainted blood scandal. For more information, please consult the Administrator’s web site for Claims related to Hepatitis C at
S.C. 500-06-000016-960

  • Lukas Walter v. Ligue de Hockey Junior Majeur du Québec et al.

This file pertains to the application for authorization to institute a class action against the Quebec Major Junior Hockey League Inc. as well as the teams that are part of the League. The position advocated is that the « Standard Player Agreement » is an employment contract by which players accept to provide services to the teams. Should the authorization to institute a class action be granted, the Court will have to decide whether the hockey players are employees. If so, the eligible players could receive a minimum wage salary and, amongst others, payment for overtime.
S.C. 500-06-000716-148 and 500-06-000719-142

The applications for authorization to institute class actions strive to determine whether defendants had the right to charge Aeroplan members a “fuel surcharge”, “airport improvement fees” and “passenger charges” according to the terms and conditions adhered to by the customers.
S.C. 500-06-000724-142, 500-06-000725-149, 500-06-000744-157

The present class action aims to obtain a refund for the tariff increase as well as a reimbursement for the diminished discounts on the unlawfully imposed tariffs by Bell Canada and/or Bell Mobility and/or Bell ExpressVu and/or Bell Mobility inc. for the following services: phone, mobile, internet, Fibe TV and satellite TV. The present class action was authorized on July 10, 2017 by the Superior Court of the district of Montreal.
S.C. 500-06-000776-159