Cervantes v. Pizza Nova Take Out Ltd. and others
Employment Law Class Action
What this class action is about
Goldblatt Partners LLP is counsel in a proposed class action against Pizza Nova Take Out Ltd., Pizza Nova Restaurants Ltd., and its franchisees who operate over 140 Pizza Nova store locations across Ontario (collectively referred to as “Pizza Nova”).
The proposed class action has been commenced on behalf of all contract delivery drivers who worked for Pizza Nova and/or any of its franchisees in Ontario since January 1, 2012.
The statement of claim alleges, among other things, that Pizza Nova violated the Employment Standards Act, 2000 (the “ESA”) and its contracts of employment with its delivery drivers by misclassifying them as “independent contractors” and failing to pay them minimum wage, overtime, vacation pay and public holiday pay in accordance with the ESA.
If you worked as a delivery driver for Pizza Nova at any time since January 1, 2012, you can find more information, and register for updates at pizzanovaclassaction.com.
Updates
December 17, 2024 – Class Action certified
The class action has been certified, following a hearing before the Superior Court of Justice on November 13 and 14, 2024. This means that the action may proceed as a class action. You can read the decision here.
Certification means that the case can now go ahead as a class action against Pizza Nova and all 141 Pizza Nova franchisee stores for the claim that they conspired to violate the Employment Standards Act by treating all delivery drivers as independent contractors, instead of employees. This means that the court accepted an argument that Pizza Nova could be considered a joint/common employer of all the store delivery drivers, and therefore also be responsible for their entitlements as employees. Pizza Nova is not appealing this decision.
Additional claims were certified against Pizza Nova, and the four franchisees for whom Juan Cervantes (the plaintiff) personally worked. The court declined to certify these additional claims against the other 137 franchisees because of a technical legal argument that Mr. Cervantes does not have an ability to sue those 137 franchisees directly. Mr. Cervantes is permission of the court to appeal this part of the decision. If permission to appeal is not granted, the Superior Court of Justice held that additional delivery drivers can to be added to the lawsuit to act as representative plaintiffs against additional franchisees for whom they worked, subject to further court approval. More information will be posted about this at a later date.
The franchisee stores are seeking leave to appeal the court’s decision to certify. The two motions for leave to appeal will be considered together by the Divisional Court during the week of June 9, 2025.
February 7, 2024 – Cross-examinations are now complete
The parties have completed cross-examinations of the witnesses in the certification motion, including almost 40 defence witnesses. A certification hearing, where the judge will hear the parties’ evidence and argument on the question of whether the action should be certified as a class proceeding, will likely be scheduled in the coming months. We will provide further updates as they become available.
January 2022 – Certification motion delayed; cross examinations scheduled
The certification hearing scheduled for November was postponed so that the parties can conduct cross-examinations of witnesses. The cross-examinations are expected to take place in the spring. We will provide a further update when the certification hearing date has been rescheduled.
June 10, 2021 – Certification motion scheduled for hearing
The motion for certification has been scheduled to be heard by the Superior Court of Justice on November 24, 2021. You can read the plaintiff’s motion material here.
Lawyers
Melanie Anderson, Jody Brown, Joshua Mandryk, Tina Yang