Articles

Words Fade Away, but Recordings Remain: the Admissibility into Evidence of Audio and Video Recordings

The extraordinary advances in technology over the last decade have made it increasingly difficult to determine where the right to privacy begins and ends. Through the lens of a cellular phone, the watchful eye of a surveillance camera or the inquisitive ear of a hidden microphone, this fundamental right appears to be increasingly eroded. Today a conversation can be routinely recorded without any particularly sophisticated or cumbersome equipment. In civil law however, many questions remain about the extent to which one’s privacy can be thus invaded.

Continue reading

Execution of Out-of-Quebec Judgments: No Smokescreen Allowed

In Povylius-Simpson v. Povylius, 2017 QCCS 2996 (appeal pending) the defendant had misappropriated the property of his incapacitated mother in Ontario. The mother’s heirs sought judicial redress and recovered the mother’s property, but needed to enforce the judgment in Quebec in order to recover a cottage located in that province.

Continue reading

Balancing Act

The English version was published in the September edition of Canadian Lawyer InHouse magazine.

Continue reading

The Res Judicata and Stare Decisis Rules in Grievance Arbitrations: Where Do We Stand?

On August 16, 2017 the Quebec Court of Appeal denied leave to appeal from a decision of the Superior Court rendered on June 21 2017, on a motion for judicial review brought by the Collège de Valleyfield (the “College”) of an arbitral award rendered on May 25, 2015 by Arbitrator Cloutier (the “Arbitrator”). The leave was denied on the grounds that while a question of principle was involved, i.e. the principle of res judicata, it did not constitute a new issue or an issue of law that has given rise to conflicting judicial decisions.

Continue reading

Arbitration Under the Health Insurance Act: Comment on a Recent Supreme Court of Canada Decision

In a recent decision rendered by the Supreme Court of Canada (Quebec (Attorney General) v. Guérin, 2017 SCC 42), the Supreme Court had to determine whether a medical specialist could submit to arbitration, pursuant to the arbitration regime created by the Health Insurance Act (the “Act”), his contestation of a decision rendered jointly by the Quebec federation of medical specialists (the “Federation”) and the Ministry of Health and Social Services (the “Ministry”) pursuant to a mechanism contractually established by them.

Continue reading