Viateur Bergeron

The appellant filed an appearance and declaration of incidental appeal in the office of the Provincial Court instead of the Court of Appeal.

Over two years later, the appellant sought special leave from the Court of Appeal to file the documents properly, arguing the trial court clerk failed to forward them.

The Court of Appeal dismissed the motion, holding it lacked jurisdiction to extend the time limit beyond six months under art. 523 C.C.P. The Supreme Court of Canada allowed the appeal, finding that while the documents were filed in the wrong office, the time limit for an incidental appeal is not strict like a principal appeal.

The Court held that the Court of Appeal had broad discretionary power under art. 523 C.C.P. to correct the procedural error and should have exercised it to prevent the loss of the appellant's right of appeal, as the respondents suffered no prejudice.

The City of Longueuil negotiated to purchase the appellant's land and accepted an offer of sale for $500,000.

Knowing the appellant could not deliver clear title due to pending litigation, the City expropriated the land instead of executing the sale.

The Expropriation Tribunal awarded $1,714,936 plus an additional indemnity, finding no binding agreement on the expropriation indemnity.

The Court of Appeal reversed, holding the $500,000 agreement bound the parties.

The Supreme Court of Canada allowed the appeal, restoring the Tribunal's finding that no transaction or agreement governed the expropriation indemnity, but modified the additional indemnity calculation to deduct the provisional indemnity already paid.

The appellants challenged the constitutionality of provisions in the Quebec Code of Civil Procedure that exclude representation by counsel before the Small Claims Division of the Provincial Court.

The Supreme Court of Canada dismissed the appeal, answering the constitutional question in the affirmative and upholding the competence of the National Assembly of Quebec to enact such exclusions.