François Goyer

The appeal concerned whether submerged strips of privately owned land lying between sold riparian lots and a navigable lake were transferred with the lots under art. 1718 of the Civil Code of Québec.

The majority held that although the deeds of sale described only the riparian lots as principal property, the submerged parcels were accessories because they were destined to serve the lots and were necessary to their agreed use as private waterfront vacation properties with direct and exclusive shoreline access.

The Court formulated the applicable accessory analysis by focusing on the destination of the principal property, the accessory’s appropriation to that use, and the buyers’ legitimate expectations.

It further held that the contracts did not unequivocally exclude the accessory rule, particularly where the buyers were not informed of the submerged lands’ existence.

The appeal was dismissed with costs, over a dissent that would have held land cannot constitute an accessory in these circumstances and that the deeds excluded any such transfer.

The applicants sought judicial review of a Department of Fisheries and Oceans order requiring them to correct works and protect fish habitat in connection with a highway extension project.

The structures, built under a Fisheries Act authorization, showed signs of instability and scouring.

After warnings and discussions, the officer ordered immediate corrective measures.

The Federal Court found that DFO complied with procedural fairness given the urgency and context, and that the order was reasonable based on the evidence of latent risks to fish habitat.

The application was dismissed without costs.

Two sets of appellants — a global air transport association and an Iraqi state entity — challenged a Quebec Superior Court writ of seizure before judgment by garnishment obtained by a Dutch company seeking to enforce international arbitration awards.

The majority dismissed the appeals for the reasons of the Quebec Court of Appeal, upholding the Superior Court's jurisdiction on the basis that the association's obligation to the Iraqi civil aviation authority constituted a debt situated in Quebec at the association's domicile.

In dissent, Côté J. would have allowed the appeals, finding that under Quebec civil law principles of mandate the property — air navigation charges held in a Swiss bank account — remained in the mandator's patrimony and was located in Switzerland, outside the jurisdiction of the Quebec Superior Court.

The trustees of a sole shareholder trust sued lawyers and accountants after tax assessments led to bankruptcies within a corporate group and the trust’s loss in share value.

The majority held that shareholders cannot sue for corporate losses unless they plead breach of a distinct obligation and direct personal injury.

On the pleaded facts, the claimed injury reflected corporate losses and did not establish sufficient interest under Quebec procedure.

The appeal was dismissed, with a dissent that would have allowed the action to proceed to trial.