In short, the main ingredient she required for her health - GS - was not contained in the ingredients. She, in sum, was taking the supplement for no reason. As such, a class action was brought forward.

Ultimately, the defendants settled the lawsuit for the sum of $600,000, among other things. In the above case, a class action was certified which then led to settlement negotiations.

It may be that in a bygone era, a legal claim to privacy could be seen as an unnecessary concession to those who were reclusive or overly sensitive to publicity, though I doubt that that was ever an accurate reflection of reality. Today, personal data has assumed a critical role in people’s lives, and a failure to recognize at least some limited tort of breach of privacy may be seen by some to be anachronistic.

For that reason, this Court may well wish to reconsider (to the extent that its existing jurisprudence has already ruled upon) the issue of whether a common law tort of breach of privacy exists in British Columbia.

The interesting question of whether the law needs to be rethought will have to await a different appeal.

This Court is able to determine the enforceability of a settlement agreement summarily, unless the Court is satisfied that there is a genuine issue as to whether a settlement agreement has been reached under the law of contract: Carlton v. Carlton, 2017 BCSC 603 at paras. 20-23 and 44.

The test to determine if parties have reached a settlement agreement is whether parties have agreed on all essential terms. Determining whether the parties have agreed on all essential terms is separate from determining whether the parties have agreed on a form of release incorporating the essential terms agreed upon. A term requiring furnishing of a release and a consent dismissal is implied when a settlement agreement is reached: see Fieguth v. Acklands Ltd., 1989 CanLII 2744 (B.C.C.A.) at para. 35.

Class actions result when a company’s, for example, actions or inactions impact a large class of individuals, rather than one individual plaintiff.

Two well-known cases, turned-Hollywood movies, of class actions include those represented in “Erin Brockovich”, starring Julia Roberts and “A Civil Action”, starring John Travolta.

Throughout Canada, like the US, class action litigation has increased in the recent years. Many of these actions arise due to “data breaches” (aka privacy and security breaches) on mass scales. This includes breaches of Yahoo, LifeLabs, and Simon Fraser University, among many others.

Product: Neutrogena Beach Defense and Ultra Sheer sunscreens, for adults and children, in aerosol spray format.

Issue: Johnson & Johnson Inc. is recalling all lots of Beach Defense and Ultra Sheer aerosol spray sunscreens due to elevated levels of benzene, which may pose serious health risks after long-term, repeated use.

What to do: Stop using the recalled products. Consult a health care professional if you have used any of these products and have health concerns. Continue using other sunscreen as directed on the product label.

On or about December 16, 2017, Ms. McKinnon received a positive result on a pregnancy test. She visited her family doctor on December 17, 2017, and was told that she was just over five weeks pregnant. Ms. McKinnon says she subsequently telephoned Health Canada, as directed on the Health Canada website for “adverse reactions”, and left her name and phone number, along with a brief description of her situation. This call was not returned. Ms. McKinnon says she also telephoned Pfizer and spoke with an agent from the Product Side Effects department. She was not provided with any further information from Pfizer.

In July, 2018, at a convention in Las Vegas, reporters for the Toronto Star and CBC (“Star/CBC”) went undercover, posing as professional ticket resellers, and attended a closed door session hosted by the secondary sales division of the defendant Ticketmaster.