Case information

Civil liability — Extracontractual liability — Whether lower courts erred — Whether application for leave to appeal raises question of public importance.

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.

In the late 1990s, Mr. Roy was the owner of a sugar bush and planned to market bottled maple water. Several years later, the product was marketed by third parties. Mr. Roy was convinced that Mr. Rouillard, the UPA and Producteurs et productrices acéricoles du Québec, with whom he had interacted in the past, had stolen his idea from him and had schemed to prevent him from marketing his bottled maple water. On May 31, 2024, Mr. Roy filed an application in extracontractual civil liability for $100,000,000 against a series of persons, including Mr. Rouillard, the Union des producteurs agricoles and Producteurs et productrices acéricoles du Québec.

At trial, the court found that the application brought by Mr. Roy was abusive and should be dismissed. In addition, Mr. Roy had known that companies were selling bottled maple water since October 2016. His action, commenced in 2024, was clearly prescribed. The Court of Appeal held that the appeal had no reasonable chance of success and dismissed the application for leave to appeal.