By Julius Melnitzer | August 26, 2025
$900M COUNSEL FEE APPROVED IN TOBACCO LITIGATION
Ontario Superior Court Chief Justice Geoffrey Morawetz, who is presiding over the CCAA proceedings brought by victims of tobacco-related diseases against the tobacco companies, has approved (2025 ONSC 4497) a request by plaintiffs’ lawyers in the two Quebec class actions for $900 million in counsel fees, some 22% of the $13.5B judgment that followed a 250-day trial. The Quebec Court of Appeal upheld the verdict, making it the largest judgment approved by an appellate court in Canadian legal history. While Morawetz conceded the award was “astronomical”, he found no “principled basis on which to reduce the quantum sought”. As the amounts due to class members could not be determined yet -although counsel stated that they expected all Quebec claimants to receive the full amount of their claims – Morawetz made the fee award subject to a reserve to ensure that this did indeed occur. Meanwhile, in what appears to have been intended for plaintiffs’ class action lawyers with visions of riches dancing in their heads, Morawetz cautioned that the case was “unique” and “should never be considered to have any precedential value”. In an unusual postscript, he also suggested that counsel had a moral obligation to donate part of their fee to a health-related charity.
Related Article: Ontario Court Considering $900M Fee Approval Request
EQUITY PARTNERS PROSPER IN SPADES
A study by the Bowmore Wealth Group notes that equity partners’ income in the UK has increased by 42% in five years and now averages C$586,500 annually. In the “Equity Partners are Really Privileged” category, the study notes that during the same period, average salaries in the UK grew by just 18% to C$57,300.
Related Article: McCarthy partners’ earnings top $1.4M
KIRKLAND & ELLIS INTRODUCES FOUR-DAY WORK WEEK
The London office of Kirkland & Ellis has implemented a four-day office week, continuing a trend to workplace flexibility among major firms. Clifford Chance and Linklaters are other firms that have introduced various types of flexible arrangements.
Related Article: Mental Health in Law Firms
FCA: AIRLINES PROHIBITED FROM WANTON “SAFETY” EXCUSESf TO AVOID COMPENSATING TRAVELLERS
The Federal Court of Appeal has ruled against arguments by Air Canada and WestJet that “passengers should receive no compensation for any flight disruption that arises in response to a safety issue.” The arguments could only succeed, the court concluded, when an airline had taken reasonable measures “to plan and conduct its day-to-day operations in such a manner as to avoid the occurrence of situations causing that risk”, and “to follow a reasonable contingency plan developed to effectively and expeditiously reduce the risk”. In the instant case, the court concluded that crew shortages that led to flight cancellations did not qualify as safety measures because the airlines did not provide sufficient evidence regarding contingency plans for such shortages. The flight cancellations, moreover, were within the airlines’ control because they had taken no reasonable measures to mitigate the disruptions.
Related Article: CTA: compensation for passenger applies to all others on same flight
Julius Melnitzer is a Toronto-based legal affairs writer, ghostwriter, writing coach and media trainer. Readers can reach him at julius@legalwriter.net or on his website.