Siskinds’ class action lawyers Linda Visser, partner, and Gigi Pao, associate, were mentioned in a recent article published by Law360.
This article was originally published by Law360™ Canada, part of LexisNexis Canada Inc.
Read the full article below.
By Anosha Khan – Law360™ Canada – Posted: April 24, 2025
The Federal Court has approved class action settlements of over $2 million related to alleged price-fixing of interior molded doors.
The April 23 decision Regan v. Masonite International Corporation, 2025 FC 721 considered two settlement agreements related to an alleged conspiracy among the defendants, Toronto-based Masonite International Corp. and an affiliate and North Carolina-based Jeld-Wen Inc. and two affiliates, “to raise, maintain, fix and/or stabilize the price” of interior molded doors in North America since March 2014.
The defendants were alleged to have “jointly controlled a substantial portion” of the interior molded door market, agreeing to “fix prices at supra-competitive levels,” increasing the price eight times along with reducing supply.
The claim did not contain specific allegations relating to a conspiracy in Canada as the pleadings were based on allegations made in legal proceedings in the United States, where two class actions were filed. There, the parties engaged in discovery, document production and depositions of about 50 witnesses.
The U.S. actions were settled. The direct purchaser settlement was for US$61.6 million and the indirect purchaser settlement was for US$19.5 million. In the Canadian action at hand, the plaintiff negotiated separately with the two groups of companies.
In July 2024, the action was certified as a class proceeding for settlement, with the class being defined as all persons in Canada who purchased interior molded doors during the class period, which ranged from March 1, 2014, to July 30, 2024.
Masonite agreed to pay $1,151,920, while Jeld-Wen agreed to pay $1,060,000. The amounts included those to be paid to class members, a cy-près payment, class counsel fees and disbursements, and administration expenses.
“These settlement amounts are modest,” said Justice Andrew Little. “Although class counsel sought to‘benchmark’ the quantum against the U.S. settlements with a discount owing to the merits of the Canadian case, I did not find the benchmark or explanation of the comparison to be persuasive on this motion.”
A settlement class member must have been revealed through the defendants’ sales data to have purchased the doors directly from the defendants during the relevant period. The purchases must total at least $400,000, making that the threshold for the claims process.
“On filing a valid claims form, the person will be paid a proportion of the net settlement funds based on the value of their purchases as against the total value of all eligible settlement class members’purchases,” the court wrote.
There were four purchasers for Masonite and 70 for Jeld-Wen, with approximate purchase values ranging from $431,000 to $19 million, with an average of $2.9 million. The cy-près distribution was for $100,000 to Habitat for Humanity Canada, intended to account for consumer and other claims not qualifying for the threshold. Class counsel will administer the claims process.
The president and general manager of Jeld-Wen Canada submitted an affidavit testifying that the
company’s pricing for the interior molded doors was “first and foremost driven by costs, particularly
Canadian input costs, including manufacturing and transportation costs.”
The affidavit described contracts and negotiations with customers and asserted that Jeld-Wen
Canada’s pricing process was Canadian and it did not seek or require approval from its U.S.
counterpart. The company was aware of the price increase announcement for U.S. customers, the
affidavit noted, but “they were not a factor in Canadian price increases or Canadian pricing in
general.”
The Jeld-Wen Canada president, who was not named in the decision, went on to say that, to his
knowledge, he had never spoken to anyone at Masonite and “never had (and was not aware of
anyone at Jeld-Wen Canada having) any communications with any employee of any of its competitors
about any aspect of competition regarding Interior Molded Doors (or any other products), including
discussions of price, price increases, supply or any other aspect of competition between them.”
“The Jeld-Wen Canada affidavit confirmed that it made its own business decisions concerning product
offerings and pricing, independent of its competitors, including Masonite,” the court wrote. “It did not
enter into any agreement or have any understanding with any of its competitors about any aspect of
competition regarding Interior Molded Doors in Canada.”
Justice Little noted that while the Jeld-Wen Canada president was not cross-examined on the
affidavit, “it is not every day that a senior officer of a defendant provides an affidavit to defend a
certification motion in a class action alleging a criminal conspiracy, let alone an affidavit containing
the exculpatory evidence just described.”
The plaintiff’s submission had acknowledged that there was a real risk that the plaintiff would be
unable to prove a price-fixing conspiracy as there were no guilty pleas or findings in either Canada or
the U.S., the U.S. evidence was largely circumstantial based on meeting and phone calls, and the
individuals that testified had no connection to pricing or competition.
It was therefore unlikely that a discovery in the present case “would yield additional evidence to
support a conspiracy.” The settlements were found to be fair, reasonable and in the best interests of
the class.
The settlements were approved along with the motion to approve class counsel fees.
Counsel for the plaintiff were Linda Visser and Gigi Pao of Siskinds LLP.
Counsel for Masonite were Antonio Di Domenico and Carolyn Flanagan of Fasken Martineau Dumoulin
LLP.
Counsel for Jeld-Wen were Katherine Kay and Maryam Shahid of Stikeman Elliott LLP.
If you have information, story ideas or news tips for Law360 Canada on business-related law and
litigation, including class actions, please contact Anosha Khan at [email protected] or 905-
415-5838.