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.

Labour law - Arbitration - Administrative law - Jurisdiction - Whether arts. 2091 and 2092 C.C.Q., which establish, inter alia, the right of each of the parties to a contract of employment for an indefinite term to terminate the contract by giving the other party reasonable notice, apply to employers and employees governed by a collective agreement entered into under the Labour Code, R.S.Q., c. C-27 - Whether the effect of Parry Sound (District) Social Services Administration Board v. O.P.S.E.U., Local 324, [2003] 2 S.C.R. 157, is to incorporate arts. 2091 and 2092 into every collective agreement and, consequently, to confer on arbitrators the jurisdiction to hear claims based on these articles.

On April 15, 1999, the Appellant announced to all its employees that it would be shutting down its hardware business on June 19 of that year for economic reasons. On the same day, it gave each of them a notice of termination for that date and sent the Minister of Employment and Solidarity a notice of collective dismissal in accordance with the Act respecting manpower vocational training and qualification. The collective agreement contained no provisions regarding what was to happen were the business to shut down or regarding collective dismissal. However, art. 8 stipulated the rights and obligations of the parties in the event of a lay-off of less than six months or of more than six months:

[translation]

8.02 a. Every employee having acquired seniority rights shall, before being laid off for a period of less than six (6) months, receive notice of at least two (2) working days; in the absence of such notice, each employee shall be paid for the notice period on the basis of eight (8) hours per day as if he had worked.

b. Paragraph 8.02 a does not apply to a suspension of work due to weather conditions or in the case of a superior force, such as a fire, flood, power blackout or mechanical breakdown, the proof of which lies on the Employer.

c. In the event of a lay-off for six (6) consecutive months or more, where it is required by the Act respecting labour standards to give notice, the Employer agrees to apply the notice periods provided for in the Act.


On April 29, 1999, the union filed a collective grievance seeking payment in lieu of notice equivalent to four weeks of salary per year of service plus damages for abuse of right, hardship and inconvenience. The grievance specified that the employer had failed to give reasonable notice of termination, in violation of its obligations under the collective agreement and of arts. 3, 4, 8, 9 and 2091 C.C.Q.

Before the arbitrator, the Appellant raised a preliminary objection regarding the admissibility of the grievance. Its main argument was that the Civil Code does not apply to a dispute relating exclusively to the application and interpretation of the provisions of a collective agreement. The arbitrator dismissed the preliminary objection and agreed with the union that arts. 2091 and 2092 C.C.Q. are rules of public order and must coexist with the collective agreement.

The Superior Court dismissed the Appellant's motion for judicial review. The Court of Appeal then dismissed the appeal. This appeal was submitted to the Supreme Court at the same time as the appeal in Fillion et Frères (1976) Inc. v. Syndicat national des employés de garage du Québec Inc. (C.S.D.) (30172).