Telus Class Action
Update – October 9, 2025:
Discoveries have now concluded.
On July 21, 2024, TELUS brought a motion to amend the Certification Order to decertify aggregate damages as a common issue and to stay the proceeding until the plaintiff obtains an “approved litigation plan”. TELUS’ motion was dismissed by Justice Morgan on June 3, .
TELUS argued that its motion was necessary because individual/consumer customers could not be distinguished from business customers. As a result, TELUS argued the question of a Class Members’ use of their phone was an individual issue and/or the certification order should be amended to decertify aggregate damages as a common issue.
In his decision dismissing the motion, Justice Morgan analogized TELUS to “a major leaguer taking on little league players”, noted that TELUS’ motion was “yet another swing an a miss” and that on the motion, the “mighty TELUS has struck out”.
Justice Morgan observed that the Certification Judge, Justice Conway, had rejected the same argument TELUS advanced on the motion at certification and had previously determined that TELUS’ own records identify whether a plan was purchased on a business or a personal account and there was therefore no issue with identifying who is a “consumer”. He agreed with the Plaintiffs that TELUS was attempting, on its motion, to “obfuscate and attack the reliability and utility of its own records”, but that that “obfuscation [was] too transparent to work”.
Justice Morgan noted that TELUS had already attempted to appeal this finding on its appeal of the Certification Decision in 2015, however leave to appeal on this issue was denied by the Divisional Court.
Justice Morgan commented that nothing in TELUS’s record on the motion is “actually new” and there was “no way to season TELUS’ position” on the motion to “make it more legally palatable”. You can read Justice Morgan’s full decision here.
Once TELUS’ motion was dismissed, the Plaintiff served a Notice of Motion for Summary Judgment in this action. Summary Judgment is currently scheduled to be heard by Justice Morgan in November 9-12, 2026.
TELUS and the Defendants in a class action against Bell concerning Bell’s undisclosed practice of rounding calls up to the farthest minute, have brought a joint motion asking the court to Order that the TELUS class action and the Bell class action be tried together. The Plaintiffs take the position that the Telus action should be determined by summary judgment and it may be appropriate for the Bell action to be determined by summary judgment following the summary judgment in the TELUS action.
The Defendants’ joint motion seeking an order for trial together will be argued before Justice Morgan on November 3, 2025. Depending on Justice Morgan’s determination on the Defendants’ motion, the TELUS and Bell actions may ultimately be heard together.
Update – April 30, 2022 –
Class Action against TELUS has been allowed to proceed by the Ontario Superior Court of Justice
Class Definition
All individuals resident in Ontario who, at any time during the Class Period, were customers of the Services on either a PrePaid Plan or a Monthly Plan offered by Telus, and who were “consumers” pursuant to the Consumer Protection Act, 2002, S.O. 2002, c. 30, Sch. A, excluding any customers who were billed by the second during the entire Class Period.
Class Period
August 18, 2006 to July 1, 2010
Contact Information For Notice Administrator
RicePoint Administration Inc.
Attention: Per Minute Class Action (TELUS)
1480 Richmond Street, Suite 204
London ON N6G 0J4
Contact Information For Class Counsel
Rochon Genova Karp Litigation
900-121 Richmond St. W. 1186 Eglinton Ave. West
Toronto ON M5H 2K1 Toronto ON M6C 2E3
Joel P. Rochon Eli Karp
contact@rochongenova.com ek@karplitigation.ca
1-866-881-2292 416-769-4107
Please find below links to the Long-Form Notices, Opt-Out Forms and the Amended Certification Order:
Long-Form Notice (English)
Long-Form Notice (French)
Opt-Out Form (English)
Opt-Out Form (French)
Amended Certification Order
Class members are advised that the representative plaintiff in this action has received financial support from the Class Proceedings Fund. There will consequently be a levy that reduces the amount of any award or settlement funds to which the class members may become entitled, in the amount of (a) any financial support paid by the Class Proceedings Fund, plus (b) 10 per cent of the amount of any award or settlement funds. (See Class Proceedings, s. 8(4), O. Reg. 771/92).
Update – December 2, 2013: Class Action Launched Against Telus For Unlawful Billing Practices
Rochon Genova has brought an action against Telus, claiming that the telecommunications provider breached its contracts with consumers surrounding the fundamental issue of “talk time” and in this regard, engaged in deceptive business practices.
The action has been brought on behalf of consumers who had a monthly plan or pre-paid plan with Telus between July 30, 2005 and September 1, 2010. The action includes residents of Ontario, British Columbia or Québec. The lawsuit claims that Telus collected a massive windfall of billions of dollars at consumers’ expense, by “rounding up” consumers’ airtime to the farthest minute, instead of charging for the amount of airtime actually used. For example, when a consumer makes a call for one minute and one second, they would be charged for two minutes. This practice was never disclosed to the consumer when they entered into the contract or at any other time.
Consumers were charged for airtime that should have been included within the time specified in their monthly plan, and consumers that purchased pre-paid minutes did not receive the full number of minutes they bargained for and were forced to buy additional time. The “rounding up” scheme also meant that consumers had to pay more roaming and long distance charges than they had agreed to in their contracts, and many had to buy more expensive talk time packages as a result of “rounding up”. Telus kept this deceptive practice secret and did not make disclosure until sometime after September 1, 2010. The action (Wellman v. Telus Corporation et al. CV-08-00360838-CP00) is framed in breach of contract and as violations of the Consumer Protection Act. The action was commenced in August 2008 and was case managed by Madam Justice Conway of the Ontario Superior Court of Justice.
Page last updated: 2017-06-29–11:06