Three claims are on the desk: a securities-law declare for deceptive traders after shares hit the secondary market, a declare that shareholders have been handled unfairly, and an atypical negligence declare. As a result of the securities-law declare wants a choose’s sign-off earlier than it might proceed, the shareholder additionally requested for that permission, often known as go away, on the similar time he filed his case.
That is the place the combat truly landed in entrance of the Court docket of Enchantment. Again in August 2025, a case administration choose utilized the authorized check used for scheduling these disputes and determined the request for permission and the request to certify the category motion ought to be argued at one listening to, not two. TELUS pushed again, saying permission needs to be sorted out first as a result of, with out it, there’s technically no legitimate declare but. The corporate additionally argued that is merely the way it’s often accomplished.
The judges weren’t satisfied. Justice Riley, writing for a unanimous panel, stated the case administration choose was free to weigh the price of working two hearings in opposition to the danger of years of delay from separate appeals, and that his name held up. Because the choose who made the unique determination put it, “one case doesn’t represent a follow.”
Nothing about who’s proper or incorrect within the underlying dispute has been determined. What has modified is the runway: the permission combat and the certification combat will now play out collectively, not one after the opposite. For advisors, compliance groups, and anybody monitoring TELUS Digital, it is a sign that Canadian courts are sticking with a versatile, case-by-case strategy to scheduling these disputes, somewhat than forcing each AI-disclosure class motion down the identical procedural path.