Facebook Twitter LinkedIn YouTube Nous joindre | English

Décision

Les décisions diffusées proviennent de tribunaux ou d'organismes indépendants de SOQUIJ et pourraient ne pas être accessibles aux personnes handicapées qui utilisent des technologies d'adaptation. Visitez la page Accessibilité pour en savoir plus.
Copier l'url dans le presse-papier
Le lien a été copié dans le presse-papier

Levy c. Standard Desk Inc.

2012 QCCA 1857

 

COURT OF APPEAL

 

CANADA

PROVINCE OF QUEBEC

REGISTRY OF MONTREAL

 

No:

500-09-022959-126

 

(460-17-001211-101)

 

 

MINUTES OF THE HEARING

 

 

DATE:

October 15, 2012

 

 

THE HONOURABLE NICHOLAS KASIRER, J.A.

 

PETITIONER

ATTORNEY

ABRAHAM LEVY

Mtre Evangellia Tsotsis

LEVY TSOTSIS

 

 

 

RESPONDENT

ATTORNEY

STANDARD DESK INC. ET AL.

Mtre Claude Jean Denis

DUFRESNE HÉBERT COMEAU INC.

 

 

 

 

MOTION OF APPELLANT SEEKING LEAVE TO PROCEED ON THE "FAST TRACK"

 

 

Clerk:  Annick Nguyen

Court Room:  RC.18

 


 

 

HEARING

 

 

10:55  Commencement of the hearing.

Submission by Mtre Tsotsis.

11:01  Submission by Mtre Denis.

11:08  Reply by Mtre Tsotsis.

11:09  Suspension.

11:34  Resumption of the hearing.

BY THE JUDGE.

Judgment - See page 3.

 

Annick Nguyen

Clerk

 


 

 

JUDGMENT

 

 

[1]          Abraham Levy has filed an inscription in appeal from a judgment of the Superior Court, District of Bedford (the Honourable Suzanne Mireault), rendered on July 23, 2012, in which his claim for an indemnity in lieu of notice upon termination of employment was dismissed.

[2]          In his motion filed before me as judge in chambers, the appellant seeks permission to have his case set down for hearing according to the so-called "fast track procedure" so that his appeal can proceed with due dispatch. He requests further that the written arguments of both parties be presented by way of exposés of 15 pages each rather than full-length factums.

[3]          As grounds, the appellant invokes his advanced age - he is 78 years old - and his interest to settle the matter in dispute quickly as it deals with his livelihood. He claims that the delays associated with the ordinary roll would cause him prejudice and that the respondent would suffer no inconvenience should the matter be placed on the accelerated roll. It should be mentioned that none of these assertions are supported by an affidavit from Mr. Levy.

[4]          Respondent opposes the motion. Counsel notes quite rightly the absence of an affidavit from Mr. Levy, and argues that age is not itself a basis for placing the appeal on the fast track.

[5]          Respondent says, contrary to the submission of Mr. Levy, that proceeding by way of a15 page exposé will cause him prejudice. Counsel notes that the complex issues of law cannot be properly treated in so short a space.

[6]          Section 61 of the Rules of the Court of Appeal in Civil Matters concerns case management in respect of appeals of right. Section 61 refers to articles 508.2 C.C.P. which, in turn, provides that a judge may, at the request of a party, undertake measures to simplify proceedings and set dates for hearing. I understand this to include the power, in keeping with the principle of proportionality in article 4.2 C.C.P., to decide whether an appeal proceeds on the ordinary or fast-track roll as an appropriate incident of case management. I understand further that placing a party on the accelerated roll may have consequences for the proper management of the Court and may affect delays faced by other parties.

[7]          In the circumstances, and notwithstanding the absence of an affidavit, I am of the view that the motion may be granted in a manner that accommodates the positions of both parties as closely as possible in keeping with the principle of proportionality. The respondent should have the possibility of 30 pages of written argument, as it would have had on the ordinary track, to avoid the only real prejudice it invoked before me.

[8]          While the matter was contested, I shall make no order as to costs given the divided nature of my ruling.

[9]          The appeal should be managed accordingly.

FOR THESE REASONS, the undersigned:

[10]       GRANTS the motion in part;

[11]       ORDERS the Master of the Roll to place the appeal on the fast-track roll for a hearing of 90 minutes in duration;

[12]       ORDERS the appellant, after having served a copy upon the respondent, to file in the office of the Court, no later than November 13, 2012, four copies of a written argument not exceeding 30 pages, of the documents that would normally have made up schedules I, II and III of his factum and of his authorities;

[13]       ORDERS the respondent, after having served a copy upon the appellant, to file in the office of the Court, no later than January 15, 2013, for copies of a written argument not exceeding 30 pages, of its supplementary documents, and of its authorities;

[14]       ORDERS the parties to present their written arguments on 21.5 cm X 28 cm (8 ½ X 11 in.) paper, with line spacing of at least 1.5 lines (except in the case of quotations, which must be single-spaced and indented), and the computer-prepared text shall be in 12-point type, with no more than 12 characters per 2.5 cm;

[15]       ORDERS that the documents filed by the parties carry a continuous pagination or tabs, a front cover and a general table of contents;

Without costs.

 

 

 

 

NICHOLAS KASIRER, J.A.

 

 

AVIS :
Le lecteur doit s'assurer que les décisions consultées sont finales et sans appel; la consultation du plumitif s'avère une précaution utile.

© Société québécoise d'information juridique (SOQUIJ) - Tous droits réservés  |  SOQUIJ est une société qui relève du ministre de la Justice du Québec