Settled Cases

Included below are selected cases that Charney Lawyers has settled.

Maher ArarArar et al v. Her Majesty the Queen in
Right of Canada et al

Ted Charney together with his law partner, represented Maher Arar and his family in his lawsuit against the Canadian government following his illegal rendition and torture in Syria. The case made Canadian legal history when it became the largest human rights settlement.



I.A. v. Dr. Thomas Bell et al.

I.A. underwent a cosmetic brow lift procedure performed by Dr. Bell at his clinic. As a result of complications from the procedure, she developed ostyeomylitis of the skull which required brain surgery and left her with permanent injuries. Charney Lawyers represented I.A. in her medical malpractice action which proceeded to trial before the Superior Court of Justice in Toronto in the summer of 2010. After several days of trial, the lawsuit was ultimately settled. Settlement confidential – July 2010*



Hambrook v. DDB Canada

Angela Hambrook was employed for four years by DDB Canada as an advertising director when she went on maternity leave. While on maternity leave, Ms Hambrook was dismissed. She filed a complaint on the basis that her employer was required to reinstate her following her maternity leave and could not discriminate against her because she was pregnant. Charney Lawyers represented Ms. Hambrook in her claim before the Ontario Labour Board and the Ontario Human Rights Tribunal for alleged breaches of section 53(1) and 74(1)(viii) of the Employment Standards Act and section 5(1), 9, 10(2) and 24 of the Human Rights Code. Settlement confidential – October 2010*


Abdi Jama (Litigation guardian of) v. McDonald's Restaurants of Canada Ltd.

Charney Lawyers represented Ayan Jama, a nine year old girl who commenced a food tampering lawsuit against McDonald’s Canada Inc. She claimed that she sustained serious emotional injuries as a result of consuming a rat head which had been inserted into a Big Mac hamburger. Settlement confidential 2006*



Mamaca (Litigation Guardian of) v. Coseco Insurance Co.

Charney Lawyers represented Coseco Insurance Company on three motions and two appeals arising out of a personal injury lawsuit brought against the insurer for alleged bad faith claims practices. The allegations of bad faith were never established but the case spawned numerous rulings. Mamaca is a leading decision on the criteria for establishing litigation privilege in the context of insurance claims. It is also the first case to consider how Courts should conduct hearings to scrutinize insurer’s privileged documents for evidence of bad faith.



Maple Leaf Foods Class Action

Charney Lawyers, together with another law firm, filed a national class action against Maple Leaf Foods to recover damages on behalf of consumers who purchased or ate Maple Leaf Food Products which were contaminated with listeria. Within six months, the class actions were settled for 27 million, considered to be the largest food contamination settlement in Canadian history. A number of arbitrations must be decided before the settlement funds can be distributed.



Salvage Deductible Class Actions: Security National, Primmum, Coseco and TD General Insurance.

Charney Lawyers represented four insurance companies who were defendants in a series of national class actions to recover hundreds of millions of dollars in automobile insurance deductibles. The certification hearing involved over 25 class actions and is considered to be the longest in Canadian history. Our firm argued a number of precedent setting motions and were successful in having all four class actions dismissed with substantial indemnity costs.



Menu Foods Class Action

In 2008, thousands of pets from across North America became ill or died as a result of consuming pet food manufactured by Menu Foods Inc. Charney Lawyers was contacted by over a thousand pet owners and commenced three national class actions. Charney Lawyers was the only law firm in Canada to commence class actions against national retailers and brand name distributors including Loblaws Inc., Sobeys Inc., Walmart, Pet Smart, The Iams Company and Nutro Products. The lawsuits were ultimately settled for 27 million U.S. and received court approval. Distribution of the settlement proceeds have been delayed because two pet owners in the United States appealed the decision.



Yordanes v. Bank of Nova Scotia

In 2001, the economy in Argentina collapsed, causing Scotia Bank Quilmes (“Quilmes”), a subsidiary of the Bank of Nova Scotia, to file for bankruptcy. Charney Lawyers was retained by a number of Argentine bondholders who had purchased bonds issued by Quilmes. Charney commenced an international securities class action lawsuit against Scotia Bank in Toronto to recover approximately 150 million U.S. owed by Scotia Bank Quilmes to the bondholders. The lawsuit was ultimately resolved in 2006*.

The bondholders recovered fifty cents on the dollar through a distribution made by Scotia Bank in parallel bankruptcy proceedings in Argentina. Largest percentage recovery from a bankrupt issuer in Argentine history.



Amoa Williams v. Allstate Insurance Company

Charney Lawyers represented a number of rehabilitation facilities and health practitioners in a test case to establish guidelines for payment of medical and rehabilitation benefits to automobile accident victims. The test case proceeded before the Financial Services Commission of Ontario and is now considered to be the leading case on determining eligibility for medical and rehabilitation benefits. This case has been cited as a leading precedent in over one hundred decisions of the Financial Services Commission.




"I have no difficulty approving this settlement.  I find it fair and reasonable and very much in the best interests of the class members.  I note that class counsel had several meetings with class members and were able to satisfy themselves that the proposed settlement would cover most if not all of the losses sustained.  That is, to say the least, an excellent result.”


                   Kennedy et al. v. Toronto Hydro et al.

        (Ted Charney and Andrew Eckart were co-class counsel in the Class Action)


"As I said to counsel... the legal work that was done on this matter including all of the allocation of various compensation categories was excellent."

Charmley et al. v. Deltera Construction Ltd.

(Superior Court of Toronto,  July 26, 2013)

          (Ted Charney was co-counsel for the

                     Plaintiffs in the Class Action)



"Charney Lawyers... is unquestionably qualified to act as counsel.”


                     Ison T Auto Sales v. Zurich Insurance

                     [Ontario Court of Appeal, November 25, 2011]

(Ted Charney acted for Ison T Auto Sales, Operating as Toronto Honda)



“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...”

Bilodeau v. Maple Leaf Foods Inc. [2009]

             (Charney Lawyers           represented Ms. Bilodeau for this class


“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)

“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)


"Mr. Charney conducted the Applicant’s case in an exemplary and efficient manner, which was to the benefit of all concerned, his clients, the insurer and myself alike.”

Amoa-Williams v. Allstate Insurance Co. of Canada, [2001]

(*This was a test case with major implications for automobile insurance claims.The arbitration provided clear guidelines on eligibility for medical and rehabilitation benefits.It has been cited in over one hundred FSCO decisions.)