Cold-fX maker sued for $110-million lawsuit
Legal World
CV Technologies, the Edmonton-based makers of flu and cold remedy Cold-fX, has been hit with a $110-million consumer class-action lawsuit.
Marking the latest setback for the besieged biotech company, the lawsuit was filed in Ontario Superior Court in Toronto by two law firms, Siskinds LLP of London, Ont. and Sutt Strosberg LLP of Windsor.
The action, based on Ontario's new investor legislation, arose from CV Tech's June restatement of finances, after it was discovered earlier this year that U.S. sales of lead product Cold-fX were vastly inflated.
The suit was filed by two investors on behalf of any Canadians who acquired CV Technologies (TSX:CVT) shares between Dec. 11, 2006 and June 2007.
Also named in the action are CV Tech president Jacqueline Shan, directors Gordon Tallman and Harry Buddle, who signed the company's financial statements, and the corporation's auditors, Grant Thornton LLP of Edmonton.
Lawyer Jay Strosberg said it is alleged that CV Tech's financial statements were misleading. Strosberg, who specializes in class-action litigation, said his firm received a number of calls from shareholders. "They were concerned at the decrease in share price. We decided to investigate."
The two legal firms have set up a website with information for shareholders who may want to join the action, www.coldfxclassaction.com.
"Investors and members of the public expect that a company's financial statements can be relied upon at all times. Our goal is to prosecute this class action and seek meaningful compensation for the class members."
CV Technologies and the other named defendants have not yet been served with copies of the action and no court date has been set.
"It's going to be an interesting road," Strosberg said.
Dimitri Lascaris, a lawyer with Siskinds', said investors deserve relief when they suffer losses due to inaccurate information.
"Our securities laws must have teeth if the investments of Canada's working families are to be protected."
Officials with CV Technologies did not immediately return a phone call seeking comment today.
Typically, such actions can take years to wind their way through the legal system or reach settlement.
This is the second time that Ontario's investor protection legislation has been used in a court case. The first proposed class action, currently before the courts, was brought against Imax Corp., also filed jointly by Siskinds LLP and Sutts Strosberg LLP.
CV Technologies has had a rough ride in recent months. On June 12, the company resumed trading on the TSX for the first time since April, when regulators in Alberta, B.C. and Ontario slapped cease-trade orders against the company.
On June 14, the company filed restatements of previously reported financial statements for the year ended Sept. 30, 2006, and the quarters ended Dec. 31, 2006, and March 31, 2007. The company restated 2006 sales at $41.4 million, compared to the originally reported revenue of $47 million.
The company is restructuring and has hired a new COO. Following the disappointing launch of Cold-fX in the U.S. market, the company's vice president of sales resigned.
CV Technologies shares closed Friday's session up a penny to $1.02. Its 52-week trading range has been between 60 cents and $1.15.
Related listings
-
Pakistan court reinstates top judge
Legal World 07/20/2007[##_1L|1365730790.jpg|width="110" height="88" alt=""|_##]The Supreme Court on Friday ruled that President Pervez Musharraf had no authority to suspend Pakistan's top judge and ordered him reinstated, a major blow to the standing of the general who ha...
-
Russia vows response to UK expulsions
Legal World 07/17/2007A Kremlin spokesman has promised a "targeted" response to Britain's expulsion of four Russian diplomats, raising the stakes in a dispute over the murder probe of a former KGB spy.Russian deputy foreign minister Alexander Grushko briefed reporters in ...
-
Holocaust Survivors' Kids File Class Action
Legal World 07/16/2007Raised on fear and depression, children of Holocaust survivors say the Nazi terror has crossed generations, and want the German government to pay for their psychiatric care.On Monday, Israelis who call themselves second generation survivors are filin...
Illinois Work Injury Lawyers – Krol, Bongiorno & Given, LTD.
Accidents in the workplace are often caused by unsafe work conditions arising from ignoring safety rules, overlooking maintenance or other negligence of those in management. While we are one of the largest firms in Illinois dedicated solely to the representation of injured workers, we pride ourselves on the personal, one-on-one approach we deliver to each client.
Work accidents can cause serious injuries and sometimes permanent damage. Some extremely serious work injuries can permanently hinder a person’s ability to get around and continue their daily duties. Factors that affect one’s quality of life such as place of work, relationships with friends and family, and social standing can all be taken away quickly by a work injury. Although, you may not be able to recover all of your losses, you may be entitled to compensation as a result of your work injury. Krol, Bongiorno & Given, LTD. provides informed advocacy in all kinds of workers’ compensation claims, including:
• Injuries to the back and neck, including severe spinal cord injuries
• Serious head injuries
• Heart problems resulting from workplace activities
• Injuries to the knees, elbows, shoulders and other joints
• Injuries caused by repetitive movements
For Illinois Workers’ Compensation claims, you will ALWAYS cheat yourself if you do not hire an experienced attorney. When you hire Krol, Bongiorno & Given, Ltd, you will have someone to guide you through the process, and when it is time to settle, we will add value to your case IN EXCESS of our fee. In the last few years, employers and insurance carriers have sought to advance the argument that when you settle a case without an attorney, your already low settlement should be further reduced by 20% so that you do not get a “windfall.” Representing yourself in Illinois is a lose-lose proposition.