right our fifth case for today is the scotch one neutral insurance company against c e design judgment and once there it is one of your big points which i think is correct so once there's a judgement the underlying claim merges into the judgement you don't have the claim anymore that's in the restatement of judgments company suing us state citizens so to speak and that's how you get your amount of controversy not being subject to the snyder against terrorists rule so that all requires this idea of merger into the judgement i'm not sure that that gives you the multiplicity of plaintive situ need for caffeine well you know i think the issue here is that you look to the issue of how many were in the class the class was sort of wide as a class right but the class once you're in the enforcement of judgement world the class is gone that the class action has said if if you're going to look at this is a as a calf a class as a is alleged calf a class action then you have a whole series of problems not least of which is that you are the plaintiffs and this classes in the posture of the defendant now that we're talking about the queen's bench judgment well i don't think we're the point the judge respectfully because i don't think registry judgment changes who know well we are we are a judgment point of but in essence we are still a defendant in the case to the point us in this case still seek to recover money against us so we are defending off that claim the queen queen's bench issued its decision i'm not sure that that's the right way to look at this i understand once you've started unraveling you can find out who was the original plaintiff and who were the original defendants and you were certainly an original defend was originally a plaintiff and asserted plaintiff class that was going after you and and so on but that you have this intervening event which is the judgment of the of the queen spent sion and i'm going to take an issue that nobody discusses i'm going to take for the time being as given the fact that a foreign country judgment can be registered in a federal district court there is one case where this court has kind of assumes a state court judgment can be but it is maybe something that you know the recognition and forcing of foreign money judgments from the state law so illinois is an act of the uniform act but it's not the same as full faith and credit at all you know since the war of eighteen twelve canada has pretty definitely been a different country from the united states couple but i think what you need to look at ruling came down to prove the plaintiffs believe their point if so they seek to collect money basic you know the reason why we're trying to fend this off is because if we don't have the judgment registered here we have no defense any collection action here in the states so so why if you look at the judgment that you registered the judgment that you registered is one that says the underlying illinois result fails to put out someone inaccurately called the due recognition foresman of the judgment if there's no personal jurisdiction if there's improper notice that's fundamentally what the queen's bench court is saying and that's the judgment we're looking at we're not actually looking directly at the illinois judgment correct found to be not enforceable by a court of jurisdiction and we should honor here and that's what we're arguing and so we have a common fund your beautified nominated million dollar plus amount that is depending upon how many immediately but no claimant has a stake greater than seventy five thousand dollars right well that's correct i mean to know those troops i mean there are depending upon how many claimants make claims there are five hundred dollars or less  you're either on the either viewpoint no claimant in the classes anywhere close to seventy five thousand that from your viewpoint it's an eight million dollars stake check this point he's after and secondly  suppose you know you've got to you you would concede that if there were jurisdiction there are quite an array of merits issues that would need to be sorted out absolutely group policy written in canada and canada doesn't have the t c p a and so they didn't dissipate this at all but i'm aware of that yeah actually i had a question about that because in your brief you said  page two the policy provided coverage for bodily injury and property damages property damage with a five hundred dollars deductible per currency excluded lived really for advertising policy limits of two million dollars is that two million canadian two million  the court is aware is a class action in illinois state court judgment entered in two thousand and seven and the first step that was done at that point was its effort was made to collect that judgment against my now we know this miss is one of these settlements like we're signing our claim to you and you're going to get whatever the insurance policy gives and so that's what takes us to where we are now but that's of course what takes us to the complexity that at this settlement level this is certain sum of money it's not any more smith gets you know fifteen dollars and twenty five cents for the faxes and somebody else gets one hundred three dollars and somebody else gets what it's structured so there is just this global amount of money and then we have the intervention of the queen's bench court insists catcha one which takes us to issues of recognition and force and of foreign country judgments which is not handled quite the same way as local right in fact in the illinois action which has been litigated on the has wrestled with what weight to give that judgment and what weight to give other evidence of what canadian law is or might not be and which is why i said i mean if if there were  jurisdiction that's just first base you know their second third and home you know left to go mean there are some very significant issues about how the  two court systems would be interacting together what kind of notice provisions are there what the canadian courts would say sometimes he says she's gets very messy between two countries well and there's active litigation still going on and s be the case or wasn't going to be available based on the records that existed at that time meanwhile the record of course has continued to develop in illinois and now the s m i has been in court there and seeking a declaration of non coverage on the merits we feel that when that concludes and it's set for trial in june that assuming that the judgment survives intact assuming the fiel federal district court fits in in this progs process well i mean what they're clearly trying to do when that's the issue before us is if the original judgment from illinois was flaw because as the the canadian judge says there wasn't adequate notice then at least that's not going to be the basis maybe some later judgment would you know good as another one of our cases yeah i'm not sure that good is quite as much as you need because of the again the general rule whether it's settlements whether it's judgments once once  coverage litigation by virtue of a collection action post judgment in the illinois state court in both cases the insurer blew the deadline to remove the case to federal court and then tried to run in the federal court much later and what this court said is no there is no jurisdiction because by virtue of the fact that this is a class action and a class judgment that's being fought about that nobody's got to seventy five thousand because right because that's where you i mean that's again where there's inconsistency in theory because it really is a class action then why doesn't catherine kick in and you don't need to worry about aggregation in canada this is well in excess of five million dollars at this point in ultimately that's where the jurisprudence of this court in the traveller's good case on the one hand and the addison domino case on the other hand comes in and i think it was your honour's comment to opposing counsel early on which of the basic litigation this is a plaintiff class you would like to be paid money for the violation of the the alleged violation of the telephone consumer protection act also not its means that think of think out there like a handful of defend classes that you can imagine we've had a few where it's been a defendant class of counties in illinois with certain bell practices you once in a blue moon you see defend a class but this is not a defendant class this is a plaint class it's trying to enforce a settlement but the point would be the class is in the position of a defendant and that's what this court held in travelers versus good about why castle would not apply that case in that ultimately is what this court circled back to an address and person stahmann oh when where you had a action initiated by a plaintive class that was removed by the defendant cafu did apply so i think that the patentee well you're really just anticipatory only bringing the infringement action you don't want to spend a lot of money and produce things and then be hit with an infringement action suit but we understand that it's actually the defendant who is the  facto plaintive in those situations isn't this similar to that i don't think it is and i think i think that that was something that the court really considered in the travellers or says good context because really what we're dealing with here is an insurance company that would like something they'd like a declaration that they don't have to cover this thing that's what they were seeking and travelers are says good as well as opposed to the add case where is the class seeking the money and the class is seeking the money here they're just doing it in illinois state court as they have been for the last ten years as well as defending in canada judgment against my client without proper notice and we've been trying to get to the merits canada in terms of the coverage issues but the fact is the judgment is still in effect the judgment is the plan is still in effect and the court has refused to base it that judgment back here we have two different judgment that we are not seeking a declaration against the class all right thank you very much thank you both counsel will take