Véronique Roy
Lawyer, Partner - Montréal
Véronique Roy is a litigation lawyer at Langlois Lawyers in Montreal.
Véronique is a versatile attorney, acting in matters involving civil and professional liability, insurance law and constitutional law. She also represents a number of public-sector organizations involved in administrative disputes.
She is frequently called upon to draft appeal factums and legal opinions on complex issues.
Véronique regularly publishes articles on various aspects of both private law (civil and contractual liability, dispute arbitration) and public law (constitutional law, judicial review of administrative decisions).
After graduating from law school with Great Distinction, she clerked at the Supreme Court of Canada for Justice Louis LeBel in 2007–2008.
In 2017, she was nominated for an award in the Social Involvement/Pro Bono category at the Leaders of Tomorrow gala of the Young Bar of Montreal.
Education
B.C.L./LL.B. (High Distinction), McGill University, 2006
M.A. (Political Science), McGill University, 2003
B.A. (Communications), University of Québec in Montréal, 2000
Rankings & Recognitions
Areas of Practice
Industries
Representative Work
Represented a hospital and a health and social services centre in three disputes involving psychiatric treatment provided between 1950 and 1965.
Represented the Chief Justice, Senior Associate Chief Justice and Associate Chief Justice of the Superior Court of Quebec in a reference on the constitutionality of certain legislative provisions conferring jurisdiction on the Court of Quebec.
Represented a public-sector organization in administrative remedies (applications for declaratory relief, judicial review).
Represented a public-sector organization in defence against an extracontractual liability suit.
Represented on a pro bono basis, before the Court of Appeal, two not-for-profit organizations as part of the constitutional challenge to Bill 21.
Represented on a pro bono basis, on two occasions, a not-for-profit organization in a constitutional law case involving physician-assisted death.
Represented hospitals and health and social services centres, as well as their employees, in civil and professional liability matters.
Represented insurers and insureds in defence against civil and professional liability suits.
Represented a corporation in injunctive proceedings to enjoin breach of contract inducement.
Represented a corporation in a dispute regarding ownership of a navigable and floatable lake.
Represented a corporation in a contract dispute involving the Copyright Act and the Act respecting the development of Quebec firms in the book industry.
Represented a federal and a provincial Crown corporation in defence against various class actions.
Publications
Articles
- 2023 – The policyholder’s life insurance positive reporting obligation
- 2022 – B.C. Court of Appeal affirms constitutionality of ban on private insurance for provincially covered healthcare
- 2022 – Delays in administrative proceedings: the Supreme Court holds the line
- 2019 – The Right to Die with Dignity: The Quebec Superior Court Rules
- 2018 – Wearing a Hijab in Quebec Courtrooms
- 2018 – The Supreme Court Rules on the Duty to Consult First Nations During the Legislative Process
- 2018 – Not Just a “Beer Case” : The Supreme Court Confirms the Constitutionality of Certain Provincial Non-Tariff Trade Barriers
- 2017 – Cheque Fraud: In 5-4 Split, the SCC Upholds and Refines Existing Defences to Conversion Claims Under the Bills of Exchange Act
News
- 2021 – Véronique Roy named Trustee of The Canadian Foundation for Legal Research
- 2018 – Véronique Roy and Sean Griffin Publish a Case Comment on Gun Control
- 2018 – Langlois’ 2018 Partners Are All Women
- 2017 – Victory for a Langlois Client at the Supreme Court of Canada
- 2017 – Medical Assistance in Dying: Langlois Represents Dying With Dignity Canada (DWDC) and the Association québécoise pour le droit de mourir dans la dignité (AQDMD)
- 2017 – Véronique Roy comments on a Court of Appeal decision on the distinction between defamatory statements and democratic debate
- 2017 – Véronique Roy publishes a case comment on a Quebec Superior Court decision on the freedom of expression of a journalist in an online opinion post
Other Publications
Co-author with Alexandra Dorval, « Commentaire sur la décision Compagnie d’assurance vie RBC c. O.C. – L’interprétation du contrat d’assurance invalidité », Repères, Éditions Yvon Blais, EYB2022REP3551, November 2022.
Co-author with Élisabeth Lachance and Camille Pichette, “Chronique – Enjeux et considérations entourant l’expertise commune” (Column – Issues and considerations regarding joint expertise), Repères, EYB2021REP3373, October 2021
Author, “Commentaire sur la décision Cantin c. Lemay – La diffamation sur les réseaux sociaux dans le cadre particulier des relations de travail” (Cantin v. Lemay – Defamation on social networks in the specific context of labour relations), Repères, EYB2020REP2918, March 2020
Co-author with Sean Griffin, “Commentaire sur la décision Veer c. Boardwalk Real Estate Investment Trust – La compétence exclusive de la Régie du logement” (Veer v. Boardwalk Real Estate Investment Trust – The exclusive jurisdiction of Quebec’s rental board), Repères, EYB2019REP2826, September 2019.
Co-author with Sean Griffin, “Commentaire sur la décision Association canadienne pour les armes à feu c. Procureure générale du Québec – Le contrôle des armes à feu qualifié sous l’angle de sécurité publique au Québec” (Association canadienne pour les armes à feu v. Procureure générale du Québec – Firearms control in Quebec considered from the standpoint of public security), Repères, EYB2019REP2825, August 2019.
Co-author with Catherine Bourget, “Commentaire sur la décision Murray c. 9197-5748 Québec inc. – La Cour supérieure se penche sur une requête en désaveu et interprète la notion de piège dans le contexte d’un vol en hélicoptère : leçons à tirer” (Case comment on Murray v. 9197-5748 Québec Inc. – In its decision on a disavowal motion, the Superior Court interprets the concept of a trap in the context of a helicopter flight: lessons to be learned), Repères, EYB2019REP2723, April 2019.
Author, “Commentaire sur la décision El-Alloul c. Procureure générale du Québec – Le port du hijab devant les tribunaux : une question d’équilibre” (Case comment on El-Alloul v. Procureure générale du Québec – Wearing a hijab in Quebec courtrooms: a question of balance), Repères, EYB2018REP2620, December 2018.
Co-author with Marie-Josée Hogue of an article on conventional arbitration (L’arbitrage conventionnel) in a collective work on alternative dispute resolution overseen by Professor Pierre-Claude Lafond entitled Régler autrement les différends, 2nd Edition, LexisNexis, 2018.
Co-author with Sean Griffin, “Commentaire sur la décision R. c. Comeau – La Cour suprême confirme le précédent de l’arrêt Gold Seal, 100 ans plus tard” (Case comment on R. v. Comeau – the Supreme Court confirms the Gold Seal precedent, 100 years on), Repères, EYB2018REP2477, June 2018.
Author, “Commentaire sur la décision Gendron c. Bourassa Chevrolet Buick GMC ltée – La Cour supérieure confirme l’existence d’un recours récursoire entre débiteurs in solidum” (Case comment on Gendron v. Bourassa Chevrolet Buick GMC ltée – the Superior Court confirms that a recursory action lies between joint and several debtors), Repères, EYB2018REP2426, March 2018.
Co-author with Sean Griffin, “Commentaire sur la décision Association canadienne pour les armes à feu c. Procureure générale du Québec – Un débat constitutionnel à plusieurs facettes : à qui revient le pouvoir de légiférer quant au contrôle des armes à feu ?” (Case comment on Association canadienne pour les armes à feu v. Procureure générale du Québec – A multi-facetted constitutional debate: which jurisdiction has the power to legislate on gun control?), Repères, EYB2018REP2413, February 2018.
Author, “Commentaire sur la décision Lalande v. Dumais – Une limite à la liberté d’expression d’un élu: l’atteinte à la réputation de son propre conseiller municipal” (Case comment on Lalande v. Dumais – A limit on the freedom of expression of an elected official: reputational damage to his own municipal councillor), La Référence, EYB2017REP2356, November 2017.
Author, “Commentaire sur la décision Séguin c. Pelletier – La frontière ténue entre le respect du débat démocratique et la diffamation” (Case comment on Séguin v. Pelletier – the fine line between democratic debate and defamation), Repères, EYB2017REP2268, July 2017.
Author, “Commentaire sur la décision Gauthier c. Salehabadi – La Cour supérieure réaffirme la liberté d’expression d’une journaliste dans le contexte d’un article d’opinion” (Case comment on Gauthier v. Salehabadi – The Superior Court reaffirms the freedom of expression of a journalist in the context of an opinion piece), Repères, EYB2017REP2146, February 2017.
Co-author with Marie-Josée Hogue of an article on conventional arbitration (L’arbitrage conventionnel) in a collective work on alternative dispute resolution overseen by Professor Pierre-Claude Lafond entitled Régler autrement les différends, LexisNexis, 2015.
Co-author with Marie-Josée Hogue of an article on arbitration (Arbitrages) published in fascicule 27 of the loose-leaf publication JurisClasseur Québec –Procédure civile II, LexisNexis, from 2011 to 2017.
Top of the page