Is privity binding to a party in a subsequent proceeding?

In Bank of Montreal v. Mitchell [1] Farley J. addressed the issue of privity. He said, at pages 738-39: Someone who is privy in interest to a party in an action and has notice of that action is equally bound by the final judgment in those proceedings … what makes one privy? … the requisite privy is said to be privity of blood, title or interest … For privity of interest to exist there must be sufficient degree of connection or identification between the two parties for it to be just and common sense to hold that a court decision involving the party litigant that it should be binding in a subsequent proceeding upon the non-litigant in the original proceeding … where that non-litigant party has sufficient interest in those original proceedings to intervene but instead chooses to stand by and have the battle in which he has a practical and legal concern fought by someone else, it is appropriate to have the non-litigant abide by that previous decision.