Montréal (City) v. Octane Stratégie inc.

Montréal (City) v. Octane Stratégie inc.

The Court held that C.C.Q. rules on restitution of prestations apply to municipalities; no contract arose here because the City never expressed its will by council resolution nor did any officer with valid delegation bind the City, so annulment-based restitution could not apply; however Octane provided services that...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
2019 SCC 57
Parties
Appellant (38066); Respondent (38073): Ville de Montréal; Respondent (38066); Appellant (38073): Octane Stratégie inc.; Respondent (38073): Richard Thériault; Intervener: Union des municipalités du Québec; Intervener: Ville de Laval
Court
Supreme Court of Canada
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
22 November 2019
Procedural Posture
Appeal (civil) / Final Judgment on Appeal to the Supreme Court of Canada (2019 SCC 57)
Outcome
Appeal of Ville de MontrE9al dismissed; OctaneE28099s appeal moot; judgment upholds restitution by equivalence to Octane
Legal Topics
Restitution of Prestations, Receipt of Payment Not Due, Formation and Nullity of Municipal Contracts, Delegation of Municipal Powers, Prescription (limitation)
Source Language
english
Municipal Law Contract Law Civil Obligations Restitution of Prestations Receipt of Payment Not Due Formation and Nullity of Municipal Contracts Delegation of Municipal Powers Prescription (limitation)

Source-derived case record

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Legal principles 6 Authorities cited 8 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Ville de Montréal

Appellant (38066); Respondent (38073)

Octane Stratégie inc.

Respondent (38066); Appellant (38073)

Richard Thériault

Respondent (38073)

Union des municipalités du Québec

Intervener

Ville de Laval

Intervener

Procedural Posture

Appeal (civil) / Final Judgment on Appeal to the Supreme Court of Canada (2019 SCC 57)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Do the C.C.Q. rules on restitution of prestations apply to municipalities?
  2. 2 Was restitution required in this case and on what legal basis (nullity vs receipt of payment not due)?
  3. 3 Is a personal award appropriate against the municipal political staff member (Richard ThE9riault)?

Ratio Decidendi

The Court held that C.C.Q. rules on restitution of prestations apply to municipalities; no contract arose here because the City never expressed its will by council resolution nor did any officer with valid delegation bind the City, so annulment-based restitution could not apply; however Octane provided services that constituted a payment not due and, absent evidence of liberal intention, restitution under arts.1491-1492 and the restitution regime (arts.1699-1700) was warranted by equivalence in the amount of $82,898.63; CityE28099s appeal dismissed, OctaneE28099s cross-appeal moot.

Court Disposition

Appeal of Ville de MontrE9al dismissed; OctaneE28099s appeal moot; judgment upholds restitution by equivalence to Octane

Orders

  • City of MontrE9al to pay Octane StratrE9gie inc. $82,898.63 (restitution by equivalence)
  • Costs awarded to Octane on the usual basis in file 38066; no costs awarded in moot file 38073