Vitek/Proplast Silastic Implants - (Taylor v. Canada (Minister of Health) et al.)


Overview

This proposed class proceeding concerns government liability in relation to the regulation of silastic devices implanted in temporomandibulor jaw joints (TMJ implants). The action alleges that Health Canada failed to properly regulate the distribution of Vitek/Proplast TMJ implants under the Food and Drugs Act, was negligent, in breach of its fiduciary duty, and violated the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms.

The Plaintiff alleges that Health Canada had knowledge that the Vitek/Proplast TMJ implants were unsafe, yet it failed to prohibit their sale and distribution in Canada. It is alleged that Health Canada's failures resulted in damage suffered by class members including injury and loss of quality and enjoyment of life.

The class of persons the action represents is detailed in the Certification Order, below. Generally, it seeks to represent residents of Canada (except B.C. and Quebec) who were implanted with TMJ devices of the Vitek or Proplast type. A similar claim on behalf of persons who received other TMJ implants has not been certified as a class proceeding (See: Drady v. Canada (Minister of Health)).

Koskie Minsky LLP and Legge and Legge LLP (John Legge) represent the Plaintiff.

Active



Latest Developments

May 20, 2010The Plaintiff's motion to amend its Statement of Claim in light of the court's decision of January 11, 2010 is scheduled to be heard on June 3, 2010.
January 11, 2010The Honourable Mr. Justice Cullity rendered his decision on the Defendant's Rule 21 motion heard on December 15, 2009. The Honourable Mr. Justice Cullity held that the recent decisions by the Court of Appeal for Ontario in the cases of Attis v Canada and Drady v Canada applied to this case such that the Defendant's Rule 21 motion to strike the Plaintiff's Statement of Claim and decertify the action as a class proceeding should be granted subject to the Plaintiff's advice with respect to possibly amending the Statement of Claim in this case to rectify the deficiencies noted by the Court of Appeal for Ontario in Attis and Drady.

Important Note: This website is intended to provide general information only. Despite our best efforts, it is not always completely up to date and should not be relied upon to make important legal decisions. This website does not offer legal advice and is not designed to answer questions about your individual situation or entitlement. It does not eliminate the need to obtain independent legal advice. Communications through this website will not be treated as private, privileged or confidential. It does not create a solicitor-client, fiduciary or other relationship. Whether you are a class member or not in a particular class action or not depends upon the court order made in that particular case. This website will be updated from time to time with information as it becomes available.