The Chief Justices of the Superior Court held that section 35 of the C.C.P., which grants the Court of Québec jurisdiction over civil matters under $85,000, as well as the provisions granting appellate jurisdiction to the Court of Québec, are unconstitutional. According to their opinion, section 35 of the C.C.P. violates section 96 of the Constitution Act, 1867, which ensures that the powers of a Superior Court may not be superseded. The Chief Justices of the Superior Court also held that the use of pragmatic and functional analysis in appeals of administrative decisions before the Court of Québec is similar to a judicial review. This is unconstitutional because the power of judicial review belongs to the Superior Court.
These two questions were referred to the Court of Appeal by the former Minister of Justice of Québec. This is a unique case of great legal interest, which involves significant constitutional questions. It directly affects the core of our legal system and has significant media implications.
A Fasken team led by Marc-André Fabien and made up of Vincent Cérat Lagana, Marc-André Boucher and Catherine Simonet represented the Judicial Council of Québec in connection with this case.
These two questions were referred to the Court of Appeal by the former Minister of Justice of Québec. This is a unique case of great legal interest, which involves significant constitutional questions. It directly affects the core of our legal system and has significant media implications.
A Fasken team led by Marc-André Fabien and made up of Vincent Cérat Lagana, Marc-André Boucher and Catherine Simonet represented the Judicial Council of Québec in connection with this case.
