B.C. judge rejects COVID-19 class action, calling it ‘abuse of process’

A B.C. Supreme Court judge has struck down a sweeping class-action lawsuit that sought damages on behalf of every adult in the province for alleged rights violations stemming from COVID-19 public health orders, calling the filing an “abuse of process.”

In a ruling issued Monday, Justice David Crerar said the case—brought by a group called the Canadian Society for the Advancement of Science in Public Policy—was plagued by procedural missteps and legally incoherent claims.

The group, made up of 171 individuals, had asked the court to certify a class action representing roughly four million British Columbians. They argued that Provincial Health Officer Dr. Bonnie Henry and the B.C. government overstepped their authority by imposing restrictions based on “unsubstantiated scientific and legal grounds,” which they said caused widespread harm.

If approved, the suit could have opened the door to millions of individual claims for damages.

‘So many self-inflicted problems’

In his lengthy decision—spanning months of hearings and submissions that filled what he called a “wall of binders”—Crerar said the proposed case failed to meet the basic requirements for a class proceeding.

“Despite eight versions of its claim, the plaintiff persists with pleadings that are replete with vexatious argument and other violations of pleading rules,” Crerar wrote.

He said the case was effectively an “end run” around judicial reviews that had already tested—and rejected—many of the same constitutional challenges to public health measures during the pandemic.

“This is another abuse of process,” Crerar wrote.

Not a ruling on the pandemic orders themselves

Crerar emphasized that his decision did not weigh in on whether Henry or the province acted appropriately during the pandemic. Instead, it focused on whether the case was a suitable vehicle for such a broad challenge.

He concluded it was not, noting the claim failed all five legal tests for certification—including the need for a representative plaintiff who could “fairly and adequately” represent the interests of the class.

The court also noted the sheer diversity of the proposed claimants, ranging from people frustrated by vaccine rollout delays to those who opposed vaccination altogether, made the case unworkable.

“It is conceivable that a more carefully drafted claim could challenge provincial health orders,” Crerar wrote. “But this is not that case.”

Context

The ruling follows a series of court decisions upholding B.C.’s pandemic measures, including challenges to vaccine mandates and restrictions on gatherings. Similar lawsuits in other provinces have also been dismissed.

With this ruling, the court effectively ends one of the most ambitious legal efforts to overturn COVID-19 restrictions in B.C.—at least for now.