In Ingram v. Alberta, 2024 ABKB 631, plaintiffs Rebecca Ingram and Christopher Scott, representing Alberta business owners, sought class action certification for losses due to COVID-19 public health orders. They argued that these orders were ultra vires (beyond legal authority) because Alberta’s Cabinet, not the Chief Medical Officer of Health (CMOH), had issued them—a violation previously confirmed in Ingram v. Alberta, 2023 ABKB 453.

Claims:

• The plaintiffs alleged:
  • Negligence
  • Misfeasance in public office
  • Breach of the Alberta Bill of Rights (property rights without due process)
  • Constructive expropriation

Alberta’s Defense:

• Alberta claimed immunity, arguing the orders were policy decisions made in good faith to protect public health.
• The government also contended that individual lawsuits were more appropriate than a class action given the varied impact on businesses.

Court’s Findings:

• At the certification stage, the court assessed procedural suitability, not the merits.
• It found sufficient grounds for claims related to negligence and misfeasance but dismissed others, such as conversion.
• The court certified the class action but limited it to individual business owners, excluding corporations.
• It concluded that a class action was preferable to allow small businesses better access to justice.

The decision underscored the legal complexities of challenging government actions taken during public emergencies.

No monetary award specified.