- i I CHRI I 0 20,2 I ALBERTA 5 veg, MATTHEW HARRISON, as REPRESENTATIVE PLAINTIFF FEE DOCUMENT CLAHI . ADDRESS FOR SERVICE Hlhartl I AND CONTACT James H. Brown Assodates INFORMATION OF 2400 Sun Life Place PARTY TI-ITS 10123 -- Q5 Street DOCUMENT Edmonton, Alberta TSI BH1 Phone: 80). 428-0088 Fax: (780) Clint G. Docken, Q.C. i 'Gompany 900, 800 - 6* Avenue SW. Gal gary, Albexla TZP i Phones {.405) 16966-12 I H5: (40.5) 269-8246 A G.ass Prqceedhg purS?.ant In the Uass Act, Chapter C-15.5 5 NOTICE TO You are- being sued. You are a defendant. I Go 'to. the end ohhis document to sea what you can do and when you must doi'}; I - i 6 Ifianant of lah on? . 1. The Reprmsenmiwre Plaird? Matthew Harriman resides ia tl: Gt; i Emomrm in tha Province. of Alberta. 2. The Defendant XL FOODS ING ls I beef Qbdifh XL has opentions in Afberta and Nehmska. Products are sold through food servioe disdbutqrs and other renal and oudqn, INC. is a. corpora'El'0? incorporated under the laws of Alberta. Its regfsiered ofH?o>>is in Edmonton, Alberts. 5. At all material tffnes, the Defendant prooessed, stored and packaged a variety of i beef praduns far puh ia Prmvirac Alina nl. 1Lse?uh?e in Canada nd. the United States. U- 4. This oluss action concerns the Dof'end?nnt's negligent qua'lIty control, mqgitqigg, imllsirfg, mmge, distfibnltiln and sde of certain Beef prodUct's. 5. The Phianff saaks im Album had been puma!. paemged as stored by Ehe Dehndant (the "Bcot") i 6. On oi' ab6'Et September 5, 2012 the Plaintiff aonsumed soma of 'Eha above Beef; 7. After Itsuming the Beef thi Pllriutiff henme dctremely ill E. Iuli (the 'I11ness'). The Plaintiff had Including severe abdomlnal mrnping, 3 VQmiLiI1g, md diarrhea and was hospitalized for testing and hataalg B. On September 4, 2013, E.coli was detected at theXL pTant in Brooks Alana (the "Br.pnks . SL Dm 201], the 'Cmacliarl Food Inspedfon Agency recalled soma beef i products produced by The- Defendant (t'he 'Reaallod Pr0duots' and 'the Recall'). '1'he Recall was extended tonggp product; in the the fintt Relall. 10. On September 28, D12 t'he Oanadan Food Inspection Agency t@pqrarily shy; 5 P1 ll. As Late Welnadiy, Sepambd 26, 2012, XL claimed that 'Ehere was no i definitive link between its beef and illnesses reportad in Afberta. 11 The PlairI!li'f's lute df the Hlhess las related Ecol! infecion. The P1ainH has suffered physical Illness, mental distress, emotional trauma and fea; forks hqahh as gram]; 9fl|is and a rei of the hull. 13. As a result of the events described above, the Plaigntiif igpurged. uperli, i 'wliilh WII be plilded Eb XL prior to The trial of 'Ihis matler. I4. The this action on hi! dm behalf and an behalf of all persons resldent Tn Alberta and Canada who purchased and/or consumed the Recalled. PIOGIHHYS Pile far Hue cr all lf the dannges suffered by the and The other Class Members in that ar. b. Food products are considered to be dangerous products because they enter the- body upon consumphm and there is no fl the Or Other Class Members to inspect the. food for contamination. Breach of the Fair Trading Act . 16. Etldt If Plalhttif anti the Other Class members is a "consumer" wlltiin the meaning of Sutton 1(ft] of t'he Hatr 'I'l?adingArct, R.S.A. c. F--2 (the . 17. Each. of the purchases by the. Plaintiff or the other Class members of Recalled Products is a "o0nsumer transacdonl" within, cf lil) ot` the FTA. clnsu!t1tEURI'ttl1fls'aOtiO1ts took place is Alberta. IS. XL is a 'suppIie1" the rxnijg qf s. |f {hl FFA ll tlte . ttatlsautlons for the. purchase by the Plaintiff or the other Class members of Recalled Products. T9. ly plactn its brands. names, lngos and trademarks on the Recalled Products and . bl! Phcing I UI of XL fhpisentcd that the Recalled were of high. qualtty, safe for consumption, and manu1'hctured' and pachagcd with adherence to the strictest of food sdety stanglardq izgllellivehr, the 20- EIXGNIIYILEG. XL ?hsd S'!tiOtr. uf the FFA which deems tt an "t1n?air practice" te. (aj for .11 supptter te. dc. or say anything that might reasonably deceive or mlstead rr consumer. Reprqegmign mi|lmtl. -- re?tllg' the Recalled Products as those. products were not of high . quality, safe for consumption, or manufactured and packaged adherence to the strictest of food safety standards. 2?l. The- Plaintiffs and Class members who purchased and/or consumed Recalled i Products claim the full puh: price these and. to ofthe FTA. Negligence i contamlnation of products, specifically the Recalled Prechets, XL is liable to the- Plaintiff and the other Class members in negligence. 2'3. AI all material limes the Defendant owed a duty of ?oare no the Plaintiff and other ingestion of those products would not cause illness or lqjury. 24. The Plaintiff and the cum dm members tread that me bmaened ns duty and the standard of ccndaat onpeoted of them In the circumstances. 2'5. The Plaintiff and lhe olher dass members state that lhe Defendanl breached ite duty by iallng to ensure that its Beefproducts were safe for Ib; Plaint'l'Ef ll the Utllr dals damages 'Whfe caused bythe negligence of the Defendant. Such negligence includes. but is not lnaited ton a. Railing te test their Beef products thoroughly prior to marlaellng and distaibion to cnmre they were mfe for i b. Railing to implemdlt, enare and qlalily cbiltrol and assurance processes in the processing, storage and of thejr Beef products; In . were becoming after ingesting them; d. to toeioleglea! allmicts ll labbltory testing beef pmduvts and advances in equipment; e. Filing to fiaamial. ramuru tu stdfing personal with expertlser in food safety; FIULQ to impilmnertt adequate procedunes for the qleaming of eqgipmmt in order to provont the oontamfnation of food pnoduots, on, in the alternative; . failed to ensure suah {honduras vraibllowod; g. Failing to implement adequate procedures to ensure tha'! outside contaminants were mt brought mto the plant where food was mmnfaetured and/or processed, or, in the zlltomalive, failed ensure such procedures were rctinnct . h. Fnili Io employ and properly train oompelent staff an proper, safe or mlomare food hardl.i??g tevhriqrws; and mm and or negligence that may i pmvan at the t1'Pa.l. of this action. 26. having knowledge ofthe poor quallty eorftrol with their Brooks Plant, the Defendant concealed this information from the consumers, the general and hguhmry a, To maintain revenue; b. To increase or maintain profit; o. To inorease or mafntain markot share; d. Tc add. negative publhityg e. To place corporate revenue and pitoiil above Ihe saitty ond lives of the of the and the other Class members; f. To avoid the eosts associated with correcting the defects in quality control'; and g. authatnalefthisavian 7 Ii- i 23. was enriched as arestalt mfits breaches cf duties awed tc the the other Class members. Xbreceived reaenues and eamed protits on the Reealfed i Products that were sold and to vorious stores, rostaurants and iintitutilxs rlrletved a ibn of the Relnlled Prctiuctl reimbursed eertain large sloresl restaurants and ins'l!l'tutinns for unsold products, the rmieriw m? lidalld Pred'uet?s have uct 'been retrieved. Xl.has not rainnbuased the or the other Class members for the Recalled Products. 3. The and the other Glass membet reserle lgli II elelt at the trial df the common fssues to waive The tort of negligence and to hate damages assessed in an amount equal to the gross revenues earned by XL, ortho net income received by XL {mm the sale df the Recalled Pmdtets. Vim-; IL 29. The PIa?irrG'H" pTeads that Xboan only act through its employees, directors, officers and agent! and 'l'S 'lca1'ld'Usl] litlble for their ads and GITIMCHIS dh pleaded. The- aolo and omissions partioularhed and alleged Tn this oiaim to have lin dltle by Xl. were Ndemll or KI.'s dhteltbih ofilcers and agents while engaging in the management, direction, contnel and cf bhsigess and are therefore acts and omissions for which Xl.,is VTCEIHOYISUW liable I 30. The and the other dm members plead that the eunduot in terms of quality eontrol, monitoring, storage, and sale of certain beef products was without cure add in dIsr@erd tf the iaith. df the Plaintiff and the other class members, and motivated by economic considerations EG 8 such as the malntainlng and market sha; Such reiers the Defendant liable te pay punitive damages. I- a 3'l. The Plaintiff and the other oTass members plead {hat they would not have I purchased nr am BEE prouuns hm tht!] lama at the defective nature of the quallty control, mnmiioing, processing, storage, dIst1l'butl'on and salve ofthe said Beef products. 1 As a resull of the negligence of the Dofendaut, Iho Plaindlf and other class members have su&red the following at Illness b. Ildt t%r1a as a l'eSHl'I! 6f 'Ihe illness or injury; In Other expenses incurred by the PlaTnt'l'ff and the other class i members; d. L- dia; In Such further and other damages 'Ihat may be pmven at the trial of this action; Dt-Fir tai ings 33. 'llme PldIlt1THIld the other Class member; nperined. phyiml injury l. a result of Recalled Products, including of abdominal cramping, vomiting, headache, fever, and diarrhea. 34. The Plafntiff and other Class members suffered injuries as a timical. The Plaintiff und. cmu Glas manbens suilened injuries as a result of fearing for 'Ehair health and their llves, as well as fearing for the health unl- Hves of family member; wb also aonmied Recalled Products. They have los'! and will continue te lose enjoyment of Hfen 35. The Plaintiff and other Class M'ombe1?s w?l'l'l continue to staffer injury nd enamtml upset Hwing from the mimrispruri of Reaalled Products for 'Ihe foreseeable future. Pecunfafy Damages dueto fllnese and the threat of illness. 57. Thly have idlmid lmviml, modlhal, mediczlfon and other out-of podcet expenses and will inaur future eare costs. They have lost Income and continue to lose iaeumo in the Emma. 5. XL is l'loble te pay damages to the and to the other Class mqnibeq Haldilgt hui UBL limited td, dmuges en acclaim'! bf dnt-of-pocket expenses associated wi'th buying the products on the Rvcoall List and such and other particulars as may be provided prior to the trial. of the summon isms. Dioprgonnd I 2-9. The and the other Class members claim in- the alternative a dfsgorgement of all revenues or alternativdy prnits nord by XL hm the Iale ct R??lld I Plbullias. 40. TIE trial I this aliim will lileely talue mule than iwdty-the days. nv complete. 41. mdthevtbardam members propos: ation be tiedin the . Cilly of Ildmonion In the Previnee of Alberta. a) a declamtion that the Recalled Products are contaminated; B) at dllallation that XL Ilrilily li?l!l? E9 Plaintiff YM NEG CUB Members for the- damages eaused by fhe Recalled Prcduetcg I c) altematively, a declaration that XL was negllgent In the manuhcturin g, i processing and packajng of the Recalled Products; d} a declamdon that Ihe sale cf the Recalled Products when they were 6OIlHI`l'1ll'lHCd, altc1!ia!i'!'cIy, pclitially VH'th YS practice and as such contravenes Sections of the FTA, and an award of damages to the Plaintiff and tc Ihe other Clasc members pursuant to Section {hl aa f) special damages in an amount 'to be pilen. af Elilali 1'hdher or alternative] y, an accounting of the revenue or net income from the cf the Rc!l1c!l.Pmdl!lB and an Qxinequring XL to dl'sg,orge the amount determined on the accounting; ti damages fw iilduff andfaa i) ?ptmiti?ve dalaglsl jj loss of Income; kj interest pursuant tc me Judgment 1nferestAc!1 2000allowed: 1) costs of this action on a solicltor/alien'! basis} ahd mj such furthernnd ofher relief as Ihis Ionourable Court may allow or counsel i may adibrl. . . i 1 NOTICE TO THE You qnly have time to do something to defend yourself against olaim: Z0 days if you are served in Alberta i 1 month Tf you are served outside Alberta but in Canada I 2 months if pu are served Canida. You can mspond by filing a statement of defence or demand for notice in the office of the i dork of the Court of Queen's Bench at Edmonton, Alberta, AND serving your statement of defence 4 or a demand for notice on the plain'E!ffs' address for 5 WARNING If you do not file and serve a statement of defence or a demand for nctioe within your time pedod, a you risk losing the law suit automatically. If you do not file, or do not servo, or are late in doing either of these things, a court may gi'le to thi against you. i