Class Action


Woodstock Apartment Class Action

On March 27, 2011, an explosion and fire took place in the apartment building located at 168 Victoria Street South, Woodstock.

The law firms of Charney Lawyers and Sutts Strosberg LLP are commencing a class action on behalf of the residents of 168 Victoria Street South who sustained damages as a result of the explosion on March 27, 2011.

Residents may be entitled to compensation for experiencing physical injury including smoke inhalation; experiencing emotional injury, including fear for your life and family; sustaining damage to your property; costs of repair and cleanup of your property; relocation expenses for mileage, food and alternative accommodation; loss of employment income. Residents are advised to keep receipts and records of any expenses incurred as a result of the explosion for evacuation.

Anyone who participates in the class action will not be personally charged any legal fees. If the case is successful, legal fees will be paid by the defendants and from a portion of the compensation funds recovered on behalf of the class.

For more information, contact Ted Charney at Charney Lawyers at 1-844-529-4050, or Sharon Strosberg at Sutts Strosberg LLP by phone at (519) 561-6244 or by email at

UPDATE - August 18, 2016 - The plaintiffs retained Roar Engineering to investigate the cause of the explosion. In their report dated August, 18, 2016, professional engineers concluded that a natural gas pipeline feeding the dryer unit had not been sealed from moisture and was weaker by corrosion over time. Persistent vibrations from the dryer caused the weakened pipeline to crack and release natural gas into the laundry room, which was ignited by a dryer burner. Review the report here.


To register your contact details with class counsel, visit this website and complete the questionnaire.


The site is not designed to answer questions about your individual situation or entitlement. Do not rely upon the information provided on this website as legal advice in respect of your individual situation nor use it as substitute for individual legal advice.

The information collected about potential class members will assist counsel in prosecuting the class action and assessing what damages were suffered by the class as a whole. Providing the information requested does not make you the client of Charney Lawyers. The court will ultimately decide who will be included as a class member.

This website will be updated from time to time to provide potential class members with information as it becomes available.




Charney Lawyers

Sutts, Strosberg LLP



“The Whiting Group Counsel Team consists of 11 law firms from 7 provinces across Canada and includes some of the most experienced class action firms in Canada with a broad range of experience in class actions with particular expertise in product liability class actions and personal injury. Four of these law firms are in Ontario where the action will be based and includes counsel who are very experienced in class action litigation and have the resources and experience to advance this claim in Ontario or on a national scale. This fact favours the Whiting Group.”

Whiting et al v. Menu Foods Income Fund [2007]

(Charney Lawyers was a member of the Whiting Group and appeared as counsel on the motion to decide carriage)



“The Settlement Agreement in the case at bar has undergone the court's scrutiny, and it appears to me that in entering into the Settlement Agreement and in seeking certification on consent for settlement purposes, the plaintiffs and the defendants, with the assistance of their legal counsel, have provided the social good of access to justice and adequate compensation in accordance with Canadian law for perhaps thousands of citizens who may have been harmed by the Listeriosis outbreak and who decide not to opt-out of the settlement, which remains the individual choice of class members.”

Bilodeau v. Maple Leaf Foods Inc. [2009]

(Charney Lawyers represented Ms. Bilodeau for this class action)



“Although I am not formally required to approve it, I believe it is relevant that, when the risks and expenses of continuing the litigation are considered, the settlement appears to fall well within a zone of reasonableness.”

Yordanes v The Bank of Nova Scotia, December 2006

(Charney Lawyers were counsel for Yordanes)