Uber faces class action from Toronto cab drivers
TORONTO (Reuters) – Toronto
taxi drivers are launching a class-action lawsuit against ride-sharing company
Uber Technologies Inc, seeking more than C$400 million ($307.27 million) in
damages and an injunction to stop it operating in the Canadian province of
Ontario.
Law firm Sutts, Strosberg LLP, which is representing the
taxi drivers, said in a statement on Thursday that the named plaintiff, cab
driver Dominik Konjevic, alleges that “Uber X and Uber XL have created an
enormous marketplace for illegal transportation in Toronto”.
Jay Strosberg, a partner at the law firm, said the
proposed case covers all drivers and taxi companies in Ontario. If a judge
agrees to hear the case, drivers and cab companies can choose to be omitted.
Imperial Tobacco, Rothmans, Benson & Hedges and
JTI-Macdonald need not make upcoming payment in tobacco class action
The country’s largest tobacco
firms will not have to make an immediate $1-billion payment to Quebec smokers
who won a landmark class-action suit.
In a ruling Thursday, the Quebec
Court of Appeal said it could be problematic for the companies to recoup the money
if they are eventually successful in appealing a
judgment ordering them to pay $15.6 billion.
The initial $1.13-billion
payment was due this Sunday after a judge ordered it handed over to smokers
within 60 days of his ruling.
Imperial Tobacco, Rothmans,
Benson & Hedges and JTI-Macdonald have appealed the overall decision that
saw a Quebec judge rule that they must fork over the $15.6 billion to smokers
who either fell ill or couldn’t quit the habit.
Class action lawsuit filed in California federal court
seeks redress associated with the 1,750 injuries a year caused by batted balls at
Major League Baseball games
Lawyers want to force teams to
use ‘foul pole to foul pole’ netting to protect fans from injury.
For over a century, baseball
fans hit by foul balls or splintered bats have struck out virtually every time
they’ve sought compensation for their injuries through the legal system. And
the reason for this slump hasn’t changed in all that time. Think of it as
plaintiffs’ lawyers in Cubs uniforms.
U.S. courts, dating back to a Missouri appeals court in
1913, have consistently applied some derivation of what has become known as the
“Baseball Rule.” The risk of being hit by a foul ball or broken bat is
well-known to spectators. As long as the stadium operator provides a reasonable
number of seats protected by netting, a spectator who purchases one outside of
this area assumes the risk of being injured.
The umpire doesn’t even have
to shout “Play ball!” In 2013, a Texas appeals court denied recovery to a fan
injured by a batting-practice home run before a Houston Astros home game.
No comments:
Post a Comment