Case information

None.

Case summaries are prepared by the Office of the Registrar of the Supreme Court of Canada (Law Branch). Please note that summaries are not provided to the Judges of the Court. They are placed on the Court file and website for information purposes only.

Civil Code (Interpretation) - Procedural law - Appeal - Excess of jurisdiction - Evidence - Crown law - Ex parte dissolution, on basis of Code of Civil Procedure provisions, of non-profit corporation created by letters patent - Court of Appeal’s decision based on provisions other than Civil Code provisions referred to in motion to institute proceedings, trial judgment and argument on appeal - Court of Appeal finding that authorization of Attorney General for dissolution of corporation created by Crown is statutory requirement and finding implied authorization in instant case - Civil Code of Québec, S.Q. 1991, c. 64, arts. 300, 334 and 355 - Code of Civil Procedure, R.S.Q., c. C-25, arts. 828 and 829 - Whether Court of Appeal violated procedural safeguards in basing its judgment on legal foundation entirely unrelated to argument even though Appellants not having opportunity to make submissions with respect to it or to rebut evidence considered by court - Whether Court of Appeal’s judgment invalid because based on authorization of Attorney General of Quebec that either non-existent, or null because granted in violation of rules of procedural fairness - Whether Court of Appeal erred in applying liquidation scheme provided for in art. 361, para. 3 C.C.Q. and letters patent of Regroupement pour la commercialisation des produits de l’érable Inc.

The Regroupement pour la commercialisation des produits de l’érable, which was established in 1993 during a market crisis, was made up of producers, buyer/processors and neutral third parties. After accumulating considerable assets, it became incapacitated as a result of conflicts of interest and the resignation of the neutral third parties from its board of directors. The Fédération des producteurs applied to the Superior Court for dissolution of the Regroupement and claimed the assets. The Superior Court dissolved the Regroupement pursuant to art. 355 C.C.Q. and appointed a liquidator for its assets, assigning the proceeds of the liquidation to the Fédération des producteurs. The Court of Appeal upheld the dissolution but declared that it was effected pursuant to arts. 828 and 829 C.C.P; since these articles require the authorization of the Attorney General, the Court of Appeal deemed a letter from the Attorney General to contain an implied authorization.