• You will need to login or register before you can post a message. If you already have an Agriville account login by clicking the login icon on the top right corner of the page. If you are a new user you will need to Register.

Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

BSE class action

Collapse
X
Collapse
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

    BSE class action

    Better get the boys over at ABP/CCA ready to sign off on this one farmers_son.

    ANNEX C – SECOND NOTICE
    NOTICE OF NATIONAL PARTIAL SETTLEMENT OF THE
    BSE CLASS ACTIONS
    This notice may affect your rights. Please read carefully.
    To settlement class members who are: All Persons who as at May 20, 2003 were resident in Canada (except the province of Québec) and farmed cattle, including but not limited to cow-calf, backgrounder, purebred, veal, feedlot and dairy producers:
    CERTIFICATION AND AGREEMENT APPROVAL ORDERS
    Class action lawsuits were commenced in April, 2005 in Ontario, Québec, Saskatchewan and Alberta against the government of Canada alleging that it was responsible for allowing the introduction of bovine spongiform encephalopathy (BSE) into the Canadian cattle herd and against Ridley Inc. (the “settling defendant”) alleging that it manufactured infected feed fed to a cow diagnosed with BSE on May 20, 2003
    A national Agreement capping liability has been reached with the settling defendant. The settling defendant denies liability and wrongdoing on its part. The Agreement is a compromise of disputed claims.
    The Québec action was authorized as a class action in June of 2007. The court in Québec has approved the Agreement. The court in Ontario has certified the action as a class action for settlement purposes on behalf of all class members in Canada, apart from those in Québec, and has approved the Agreement. Complete information on the Agreement with the settling defendant can be found at www.bseclassaction.ca.
    The class action lawsuits will continue to be prosecuted against those defendants who did not participate in the Agreement, including and especially the government of Canada.
    This notice is a summary only. If you believe you are a settlement class member, you may review and/or obtain copies of the judgments and the Agreement at the website www.bseclassaction.ca or by contacting the Administrator toll free at 1-866-800-0075. Questions concerning the Agreement may be directed to the Administrator by telephone or email: bse@crawco.ca.
    THE AGREEMENT
    The settling defendant will pay the sum of $6 million in full and final settlement of all claims against it by the settlement class members including interest and costs. These monies will be used to fund the ongoing class actions against the government of Canada in accordance with the terms of the Agreement. The settling defendant remains in the actions to co-operate as the plaintiffs pursue their claims against the government of Canada.
    Crawford Class Action Services has been appointed by the courts as Administrator of the Agreement and will oversee the use of the settlement funds. The court will supervise the administration and operation of the distribution of these funds.
    The Settlement Fund Trust Instrument setting out the terms and conditions for the use of the settlement monies in the funding of the BSE class actions against the government of Canada can be found at www.bseclassaction.ca.
    Class Counsel Fees and Administration Expenses
    The fees and disbursements (including applicable taxes) of class counsel in the class actions to the date of the approval by the courts of the Agreement and the costs of administration have been calculated and fixed by the courts to not exceed $1.5 million.
    RELEASE OF CLAIMS AND EFFECT ON OTHER PROCEEDINGS
    A settlement class member who does not opt out of the class proceeding will not be able to bring or maintain any other claim or legal proceeding in connection with any aspect of the BSE crisis against the settling defendant. Any action that a settlement class member who does not opt out has or may commence will be or be deemed to be dismissed.
    OPTING OUT
    Any settlement class member who does not wish to participate in the Agreement must opt out of the Agreement by sending a written and signed election to the Administrator:
    BSE Class Action
    Crawford Class Action Services
    101 Randall Drive, Unit A
    Waterloo, Ontario N2V 1C5
    Telephone 1 888 842 1331
    Fax 519 578 4016
    bse@crawco.ca
    PLEASE NOTE CAREFULLY that any settlement class member who elects to opt out of the Agreement will be deemed to have opted out of the ongoing class actions against the defendants who did not participate in the Agreement, including and especially the government of Canada.
    The written election to opt out must state the person’s full name, current address and telephone number, the number of cattle owned on May 20, 2003 and that the person opts out of the BSE class actions. It must be signed by the person opting out or an authorized representative of the person.
    To be effective the written opt out must be sent to the Administrator by mail or courier, postmarked on or before ***, 2008.
    Any settlement class member who opts out will not be eligible for any of the benefits that may result from any successful conclusion of the BSE class actions, whether by way of trial or further settlement.
    Do not opt out if you wish to share in the benefits should the actions be successful against the government of Canada.
    TERMINATION OF THE AGREEMENT
    At the election of the settling defendant, the Agreement and the approvals of the courts will be null and void and of no force and effect if settlement class members who owned more than 1.5 million cattle on May 20, 2003 opt out of the class actions.
    INTERPRETATION
    This notice is a summary of some of the terms of the Agreement. If there is a conflict between the provisions of this notice and the terms of the Agreement, the Agreement shall prevail.
    This notice is approved by the Superior Court of Justice for Ontario.
    Any questions about the substantive matters in this notice should not be directed to the courts as their administrative structures are not designed to address this type of inquiry.

    #2
    I'd like to opt out on the grounds this is total garbage. I do not blame the Government of Canada for the introduction of BSE and certainly do not blame Ridley for selling "infected feed". To do so would go against my beliefs on the true origin and spread of BSE, which are greatly influenced by the research of the late Mark Purdey.
    I think this is a contemptable action designed to profit lawyers and as far as I'm concerned taking the $6 million off Ridley was nothing more than blackmail - pay up or we'll ruin your company. Show me the proof that any BSE case in Canada can be traced conclusively back to a batch of Ridley feed.

    Comment


      #3
      Couldn't agree with you more Grassfarmer. The bigger issue is what have we done since our first case of BSE. Some of the feed contamination concerns should have been no brainers anyway. The feed transfer through contaminated feed is still a theory just like Purdy's theory. A theory is a plausible explanation not yet proven as fact. We all agree there are some things that should never be fed to a cow. Of larger concern is that we doggedly stuck to a theory that aligning our selves with the US and not setting ourselves apart by using testing etc would somehow improve our lot. We missed the boat and are now neck deep in water over ego's I guess. Will testing save our butts. Not likely but what we did didn't either. Not lobbying to have the ability to test makes me wonder what other ideas were stonewalled that we never caught wind of.

      Comment


        #4
        I have never thought Ridley should be included in this, as they were following the rules of the day at that time.

        From what I have been told, all the cases we've had in Canada have one rendering plant in common. To me, that makes the feed transmission theory stronger. It doesn't explain how the first case came to be though, so I think both theories are correct. For something to be transmitted in feed, it's got to exist, and we still don't know how that very first case came to happen.

        In my opinion, the government of the day dropped the ball when that 1992 cow was found. They could have handled it a lot more agressively than they did. They knew what was going on in Britain, and knowing that we had that cow here in 92, they should have been a lot more proactive than they were.

        Comment


          #5
          When I first ran in to old Pallet, it was not on the greatest of terms either. I am also a Purdy fan. If you studied Purdy well enough though, you would see that he did not discount the potential for feed transmission completely. I will still argue that a misfiled prion can not be simply digested and passed to an unfortunate host, but the metal that caused the original animal to acquire BSE could very well be passed through MBM.

          That being said, If you don't want to blame the government and go after some much needed industry money -- that is your choice.

          I dream of this case being settled out of court for --- let's say a billion rather than the ten that these guys are after (for you). I also dream of the 1 billion being tied to the producer owned "Canada Gold" program where we use it to buy our industry back from the two multinational packers. If they don't want to sell, 1 Billion would more than cover the costs of new plants, marketing all over the world, and more.

          Can't even imagine how far in the dust that billion dollars would leave the likes of ABP/CCA.

          Comment


            #6
            http://www.bseclassaction.ca/english/index_en.htm

            This is the site for the class action suit.

            Comment


              #7
              There isn't much that a Billion Bucks won't fix.

              Comment


                #8
                I've posted my thoughts on the origin of BSE on here many times - Purdey probably was onto something about the original causes of BSE but undoubtedly the majority of the BSE cases in the UK were as a result of "contaminated feed". Contaminated feed however could not be the cause of the original cases and equally it is clear not all cases were caused by the agents that Purdey identified.
                However, none of this is really relevant to Canada post 2003. We did not have a BSE crisis in Canada - domestic consumers bought more beef not less, a world first. Sure we were closed out of some export markets at the packers behest for a while but this was not a BSE crisis. Most of the crippling financial challenges placed on producers in Canada post 2003 have nothing to do with BSE. How about going after the real causes? A class action law suit to force the Government of Canada to properly implement their existing competition laws? This could start by forcing the packers to open their books as requested way back when. Even if you don't go with a class action law suit the ABP/CCA would have been better spending producer checkoff dollars on fighting this battle instead of wasting dollars on fighting the insignificant pride of red-neck Montana - RCALF.
                To me this lawsuit is just another distraction to draw our attention away from the real and current issues - oh, and also a nice make work project for lawyers.

                Comment


                  #9
                  The way I dream about this grassfarmer, we could solve some of the very issues that I agree are in the forefront if we had the cash to do it with. But hay man we will never agree on everything.

                  How about you farmers_son? No opinion? Maybe we found something here that we can agree on.

                  Comment


                    #10
                    I think you need to realise what we are up against when considering running against the "big boys". A billion dollars sounds great to most ranchers but a one off payment of a billion would not buy us much independence or security even if we did choose to invest it all in producer owned packing infrastructure.
                    Consider in 2004 Cargill had a turnover of $92 billion and their annual profit was close to $3 billion.
                    We could not compete with those type of resources and make no mistake they would use them to crush any upstart competitor. They did not spend the last 20 years ruthlessly eliminating the competition just to turn around and welcome a producer owned plant in their marketplace. A billion dollar producer organisation would not be able to "fly under the radar" either.
                    This is why I feel our emphasis has got to be on lobbying Government for the introduction and enforcement of proper anti-competition laws. We have got to change the status quo to improve things.

                    Comment


                      #11
                      "This is why I feel our emphasis has got to be on
                      lobbying Government for the introduction and
                      enforcement of proper anti-competition laws. We
                      have got to change the status quo to improve
                      things."

                      I agree Grassfarmer. We actually have on the books
                      some very good anti-competition laws, just the
                      enforcement of those laws has fallen by the
                      wayside. For some odd reason, the Canadian
                      government economists seem to feel that 2
                      companies make for a genuinely competitive
                      marketplace.

                      As far as the class action suit goes, I do support
                      having that money turned back into infrastructure,
                      although I'd prefer the 10 billion. After the
                      infrastructure is in place though, we'd need genuine
                      government support to ensure that the existing
                      packers don't cut prices below cost to drive out the
                      upstart.

                      Rod

                      Comment

                      • Reply to this Thread
                      • Return to Topic List
                      Working...