April 24, 2018
Duval Hesler, J.C.Q.
Application for provision for costs. Dismissed.
The Chief Justices, Associate Chief Justice, and Deputy Chief Justice of the Superior Court of Quebec argue that the Attorneys General of Quebec and Canada should assume their professional fees and all relevant costs incurred in the context of this reference. They argue that it is a question of avoiding any appearance of conflict of interest or violation of the principles of independence and impartiality by the judicial system.
In constitutional matters, a court may wield its discretionary power to award a provision for costs only if each of the three applicable requirements is met. In this case, while the referral is prima facie meritorious and of sufficient interest, the applicants have not proved that they are unable to pay. Furthermore, they are wrong to claim that proof of inability to pay was not made in Quebec (Procureure générale) c. D’Amico (C.A. 2016-02-24), 2016 QCCA 351, SOQUIJ AZ-51258070, 2016EXP-891. It remains open to them, during or subsequent to the reference, to ask the Court to grant them legal costs including professional fees and expert costs, as permitted by the case law.
*Summary by SOQUIJ
Official English version of the decision: http://citoyens.soquij.qc.ca
An RSS feed allows you to keep up to date with any recent updates published on a website. By subcribing to our RSS feed, you will automatically receive the latest news related to your RSS feed and view them at any time.