Jean Renaud

The appellant sought to intervene under art. 208 of the Code of Civil Procedure to represent her husband in his action for damages, arguing he was incapable of representing himself.

The Superior Court dismissed the application, holding that under art. 62 C.C.P. and s. 128 of the Act respecting the Barreau du Québec, only advocates may plead for another person.

The Court of Appeal denied leave to appeal.

The Supreme Court of Canada dismissed the appeal, confirming that the intervention procedure does not override the statutory monopoly of advocates to represent others in court, and that allowing the appellant to represent her husband would bypass the legal mechanisms for instituting protective supervision for incapable persons.

The deceased, a Quebec resident, was killed in a motor vehicle accident in British Columbia.

His spouse and children received statutory death and dependants' benefits under the Quebec no-fault insurance scheme.

They also brought a tort action in British Columbia.

The appellants sought to deduct the Quebec benefits from the tort settlement under s. 25 of the British Columbia Insurance (Motor Vehicle) Act.

The Supreme Court of Canada held that the Quebec benefits were 'similar' to those under the British Columbia Insurance Act and must be deducted from the overall tort award to prevent double recovery, rejecting the requirement for a specific 'match' between heads of damage.