Ridley to appeal decision on BSE action 02.22.2006
(Staff) — Winnipeg feedmaker Ridley Inc. said Friday it's seeking to appeal an Ontario court ruling that allows a massive, proposed class-action suit against the firm to proceed to its next preliminary stage.
The Ontario Superior Court of Justice on January 5 rejected a motion from Ridley asking for early dismissal of the proposed suit filed against the company in that province.
The company faces proposed class-action suits on behalf of cattlemen in Ontario, Saskatchewan, Alberta and Quebec, all making similar claims that the company's "inaction and negligence" prior to Canada's 1997 ban on using rendered ruminants in cattle feed contributed to the BSE crisis.
The proposed class actions, filed last April, had also named the federal government, individual unnamed federal bureaucrats and Ridley Corp. Ltd., the company's Australian parent, and claimed general, special, aggravated and punitive damages running into several hundreds of millions of dollars.
The three other suits had been on hold, pending a decision in Ontario on the preliminary motion for dismissal that Ridley filed in October. Ridley had argued that the Ontario claims "presented no reasonable cause of action under Canadian law."
The company announced Friday that it's filing a notice of motion with the Divisional Court of Ontario, seeking leave to appeal the Superior Court's decision. Ridley, in a release, said it believes the Superior Court decision "conflicts with Supreme Court of Canada case law and other court decisions."
The Superior Court ruling doesn't impact on the merits of the case itself but simply allows the Ontario suit to proceed to its next stages — including decisions on whether it can be certified as a class action, the company said.
The Ontario suit, if certified, would include cattlemen from Manitoba and the five other provinces as members of its "class." Cattleman Bill Sauer of Niagara Falls is the Ontario suit's representative plaintiff.
The Quebec suit alleges calf starter made by a Ridley plant in the months before the 1997 feed ban took effect was the probable source of BSE infection for "Cow Zero" — the BSE-positive Alberta cow whose detection led to the U.S. and other countries shutting their borders to Canadian beef and live cattle.
It also alleges that Ridley kept using rendered ruminants in its feed up until Canada's feed ban, even though its parent firm had joined a voluntary feed ban in Australia the year earlier. It further alleges the Canadian government was negligent in not imposing its feed ban earlier.
The company noted that the Ontario court struck all the suit's claims against Ridley Corp. Ltd., its Australian parent firm, although the claims against the Canadian government remain.
http://www.agcanada.com/custompages/multistory.aspx?mid=154#1087
STRICTLY PRIVATE AND CONFIDENTIAL 25, AUGUST 1995
snip...
To minimise the risk of farmers' claims for compensation from feed
compounders.
To minimise the potential damage to compound feed markets through adverse publicity.
To maximise freedom of action for feed compounders, notably by
maintaining the availability of meat and bone meal as a raw
material in animal feeds, and ensuring time is available to make any
changes which may be required.
snip...
THE FUTURE
4..........
MAFF remains under pressure in Brussels and is not skilled at
handling potentially explosive issues.
5. Tests _may_ show that ruminant feeds have been sold which
contain illegal traces of ruminant protein. More likely, a few positive
test results will turn up but proof that a particular feed mill knowingly
supplied it to a particular farm will be difficult if not impossible.
6. The threat remains real and it will be some years before feed
compounders are free of it. The longer we can avoid any direct
linkage between feed milling _practices_ and actual BSE cases,
the more likely it is that serious damage can be avoided. ...
SEE full text ;
http://www.bseinquiry.gov.uk/files/yb/1995/08/24002001.pdf
TSS
(Staff) — Winnipeg feedmaker Ridley Inc. said Friday it's seeking to appeal an Ontario court ruling that allows a massive, proposed class-action suit against the firm to proceed to its next preliminary stage.
The Ontario Superior Court of Justice on January 5 rejected a motion from Ridley asking for early dismissal of the proposed suit filed against the company in that province.
The company faces proposed class-action suits on behalf of cattlemen in Ontario, Saskatchewan, Alberta and Quebec, all making similar claims that the company's "inaction and negligence" prior to Canada's 1997 ban on using rendered ruminants in cattle feed contributed to the BSE crisis.
The proposed class actions, filed last April, had also named the federal government, individual unnamed federal bureaucrats and Ridley Corp. Ltd., the company's Australian parent, and claimed general, special, aggravated and punitive damages running into several hundreds of millions of dollars.
The three other suits had been on hold, pending a decision in Ontario on the preliminary motion for dismissal that Ridley filed in October. Ridley had argued that the Ontario claims "presented no reasonable cause of action under Canadian law."
The company announced Friday that it's filing a notice of motion with the Divisional Court of Ontario, seeking leave to appeal the Superior Court's decision. Ridley, in a release, said it believes the Superior Court decision "conflicts with Supreme Court of Canada case law and other court decisions."
The Superior Court ruling doesn't impact on the merits of the case itself but simply allows the Ontario suit to proceed to its next stages — including decisions on whether it can be certified as a class action, the company said.
The Ontario suit, if certified, would include cattlemen from Manitoba and the five other provinces as members of its "class." Cattleman Bill Sauer of Niagara Falls is the Ontario suit's representative plaintiff.
The Quebec suit alleges calf starter made by a Ridley plant in the months before the 1997 feed ban took effect was the probable source of BSE infection for "Cow Zero" — the BSE-positive Alberta cow whose detection led to the U.S. and other countries shutting their borders to Canadian beef and live cattle.
It also alleges that Ridley kept using rendered ruminants in its feed up until Canada's feed ban, even though its parent firm had joined a voluntary feed ban in Australia the year earlier. It further alleges the Canadian government was negligent in not imposing its feed ban earlier.
The company noted that the Ontario court struck all the suit's claims against Ridley Corp. Ltd., its Australian parent firm, although the claims against the Canadian government remain.
http://www.agcanada.com/custompages/multistory.aspx?mid=154#1087
STRICTLY PRIVATE AND CONFIDENTIAL 25, AUGUST 1995
snip...
To minimise the risk of farmers' claims for compensation from feed
compounders.
To minimise the potential damage to compound feed markets through adverse publicity.
To maximise freedom of action for feed compounders, notably by
maintaining the availability of meat and bone meal as a raw
material in animal feeds, and ensuring time is available to make any
changes which may be required.
snip...
THE FUTURE
4..........
MAFF remains under pressure in Brussels and is not skilled at
handling potentially explosive issues.
5. Tests _may_ show that ruminant feeds have been sold which
contain illegal traces of ruminant protein. More likely, a few positive
test results will turn up but proof that a particular feed mill knowingly
supplied it to a particular farm will be difficult if not impossible.
6. The threat remains real and it will be some years before feed
compounders are free of it. The longer we can avoid any direct
linkage between feed milling _practices_ and actual BSE cases,
the more likely it is that serious damage can be avoided. ...
SEE full text ;
http://www.bseinquiry.gov.uk/files/yb/1995/08/24002001.pdf
TSS