Vachon v. Attorney General (Quebec)

Vachon v. Attorney General (Quebec)

The Supreme Court held that plaintiffs were not obliged to proceed by evocation under art. 846 C.C.P.; the article is permissive and art. 33 does not bar ordinary actions for declaratory relief. Procedural defects such as lack of prior authorization do not amount to absolute nullity where the defect is remediable and effectively covered by the trial judge's decision. Consequently the appeals were allowed and the cases remitted for decision on the merits.

Citation
[1979] 1 SCR 555
Parties
Appellant (plaintiff): Sylvie Vachon; Appellant (plaintiff): Maurice Richard; Respondent (defendant): Attorney General of the Province of Quebec representing Her Majesty the Queen
Court
Supreme Court of Canada
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
23 January 1979
Procedural Posture
Declaratory Action Challenging Regulatory Provision Under Social Aid Regulation; Civil Procedure/administrative Law / Appeal to the Supreme Court of Canada From the Quebec Court of Appeal; Appeals Allowed and Remitted to Court of Appeal for Decision on Merits
Outcome
Appeals allowed; judgments of the Court of Appeal reversed in part; matters remitted to the Court of Appeal for decision on the merits; costs awarded to appellants.
Legal Topics
Declaratory Relief, Evocation (art. 846 C.c.p.), Superintending and Reforming Power of Superior Court, Procedural Nullity, Ultra Vires Review, Choice of Remedy
Source Language
English
Civil Procedure Administrative Law Social Welfare Law Constitutional/municipal Law Declaratory Relief Evocation (art. 846 C.c.p.) Superintending and Reforming Power of Superior Court Procedural Nullity +2 more

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Legal principles 4 Authorities cited 3 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Sylvie Vachon

Appellant (plaintiff)

Maurice Richard

Appellant (plaintiff)

Attorney General of the Province of Quebec representing Her Majesty the Queen

Respondent (defendant)

Procedural Posture

Declaratory Action Challenging Regulatory Provision Under Social Aid Regulation; Civil Procedure/administrative Law / Appeal to the Supreme Court of Canada From the Quebec Court of Appeal; Appeals Allowed and Remitted to Court of Appeal for Decision on Merits

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether plaintiffs were required to proceed by evocation under art. 846 C.C.P. rather than by ordinary action
  2. 2 Whether failure to obtain prior authorization under art. 834 C.C.P. or choice of remedy constitutes absolute nullity
  3. 3 Whether Superior Court had jurisdiction to grant declaratory relief invalidating a regulatory provision

Ratio Decidendi

The Supreme Court held that plaintiffs were not obliged to proceed by evocation under art. 846 C.C.P.; the article is permissive and art. 33 does not bar ordinary actions for declaratory relief. Procedural defects such as lack of prior authorization do not amount to absolute nullity where the defect is remediable and effectively covered by the trial judge's decision. Consequently the appeals were allowed and the cases remitted for decision on the merits.

Court Disposition

Appeals allowed; judgments of the Court of Appeal reversed in part; matters remitted to the Court of Appeal for decision on the merits; costs awarded to appellants.

Orders

  • Appeals allowed
  • Both cases returned to the Court of Appeal for decision on the merits