Voltage Reverse Class Proceeding Denied

Justice Boswell of the Federal Court of Canada has denied Voltage’s motion to certify a “reverse” class proceeding for copyright infringement against a class of unidentified internet subscribers and alleged BitTorrent users.

CIPPIC intervened in the motion, arguing among other things that Voltage’s pleadings did not disclose a reasonable cause of action and that a class proceeding was not preferable given that it would amount to individual factual inquiries specific to each class member.  The Court agreed on both counts.  In rejecting the motion, Justice Boswell concluded:

[77]  I agree with CIPPIC’s submissions that Voltage’s pleadings do not disclose a reasonable cause of action with respect to primary infringement.  While Voltage alleges that its forensic software identified a direct infringement in [sic] Voltage’s films, Voltage has failed to identify a Direct Infringer in its amended notice of application. ... 

[...]

[160]  A class proceeding is not a preferable procedure for the just and efficient resolution of any common issues which may exist.  The proposed proceeding would require multiple individual fact-findings for each class member on almost every issue. ...

• Decision:  Voltage Pictures et al. v Salna et al. 2019 FCC 1412
• CIPPIC's Intervener Arguments