Quebec Workmen’s Compensation Commission v. Gagnon et al.

Quebec Workmen’s Compensation Commission v. Gagnon et al.

The Commission's statutory subrogation occurred upon the workman's election, conferring on the Commission exclusive entitlement to recover amounts it paid; the workman could only pursue the additional sum under s.8, so the Commission lacked the necessary interest to intervene in the victim's action and could not rely on that action to interrupt prescription; therefore the Commission's recovery claim was prescribed and intervention was not receivable.

Citation
[1981] 2 SCR 676
Parties
Intervener Appellant: Quebec Workmen’s Compensation Commission; Plaintiff Respondent: Jean-Pierre Gagnon; Defendants Respondents: Gérard Forget and Laurentian Motor Leasing Limited
Court
Supreme Court of Canada
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
17 December 1981
Procedural Posture
Workmen's Compensation; Labour Law (appeal) / Appeal to the Supreme Court of Canada (judgment)
Outcome
Appeal dismissed with costs.
Legal Topics
Subrogation, Election, Intervention, Prescription, Workmen's Compensation, Interest to Intervene, Interruption of Prescription
Source Language
English
Labour Law Insurance Civil Procedure Prescription (limitation) Statutory Interpretation Subrogation Election Intervention +4 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 9 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Quebec Workmen’s Compensation Commission

Intervener Appellant

Jean-Pierre Gagnon

Plaintiff Respondent

Gérard Forget and Laurentian Motor Leasing Limited

Defendants Respondents

Procedural Posture

Workmen's Compensation; Labour Law (appeal) / Appeal to the Supreme Court of Canada (judgment)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Effect of statutory subrogation under s.7(3) of the Workmen's Compensation Act
  2. 2 Whether the Commission had sufficient interest to intervene under art.208 C.C.P.
  3. 3 Whether the victim's action interrupted prescription as to the Commission's right to recover

Ratio Decidendi

The Commission's statutory subrogation occurred upon the workman's election, conferring on the Commission exclusive entitlement to recover amounts it paid; the workman could only pursue the additional sum under s.8, so the Commission lacked the necessary interest to intervene in the victim's action and could not rely on that action to interrupt prescription; therefore the Commission's recovery claim was prescribed and intervention was not receivable.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed with costs.

Orders

  • Appeal dismissed with costs.
  • Intervention not received; Commission lacked interest and its claim was prescribed.