Case information
Conduct a refined search of the Supreme Court of Canada database to obtain details on the status of a matter before the Court.
30299
Francine Bourdon, et al. v. Stelco Inc.
(Quebec) (Civil) (By Leave)
Docket
Judgments on applications for leave to appeal are rendered by the Court, but are not necessarily unanimous.
| Date | Proceeding | Filed By (if applicable) |
|---|---|---|
| 2005-11-28 | Appeal closed | |
| 2005-11-14 | Formal judgment sent to the registrar of the court of appeal and all parties, (Judgment on reasons sent). | |
| 2005-11-14 | Judgment on appeal and notice of deposit of judgment sent to all parties, (Judgment on reasons sent). | |
| 2005-11-10 |
Written reasons rendered after oral judgment, CJ Ma Ba Bi LeB De F Abe Cha, The appeal from the judgment of the Court of Appeal of Quebec (Montréal), Number 500-09-009876-004, dated March 1, 2004, was heard on June 10, 2005, and the Court on that day delivered the following judgment orally: The Chief Justice – We are all of the view that this appeal should be dismissed. Reasons to follow. On this day, reasons were delivered and the judgment was restated as follows: The appeal should be dismissed with costs. Dismissed, with costs |
|
| 2005-09-07 | Record returned to the Registrar of the Court of Appeal | |
| 2005-07-05 | Transcript received, (28 pages) | |
| 2005-06-13 | Judgment on appeal and notice of deposit of judgment sent to all parties | |
| 2005-06-10 |
Judgment on the appeal rendered, CJ Ma Ba Bi LeB De F Abe Cha, The appeal from the judgment of the Court of Appeal of Quebec (Montreal), Number 500-09-009876-004, dated March 1, 2004, was heard this day and the following judgment was rendered: [Translation] The Chief Justice (orally) – We are all of the view that this appeal should be dismissed. Reasons to follow. Dismissed |
|
| 2005-06-10 | Judgment reserved OR rendered with reasons to follow | |
| 2005-06-10 | Appellant's condensed book, Submitted in Court (14 copies) | Francine Bourdon |
| 2005-06-10 | Acknowledgement and consent for video taping of proceedings, From all parties | |
| 2005-06-10 |
Hearing of the appeal, 2005-06-10, CJ Ma Ba Bi LeB De F Abe Cha Judgment rendered |
|
| 2005-06-03 | Notice of appearance, Deborah McPhail will be appearing at the hearing. | Superintendent of Financial Services |
| 2005-05-27 | Notice of appearance, Claude Tardif, Gaétan Lévesque and Stéphane Forest will be present at the hearing. | Francine Bourdon |
| 2005-05-24 |
Order by, Cha, FURTHER TO THE ORDER of Charron J. dated April 22, 2005, granting leave to intervene to the Superintendent of Financial Services of Ontario; IT IS HEREBY FURTHER ORDERED THAT the said intervener is granted permission to present oral argument not exceeding fifteen (15) minutes at the hearing of the appeal. Granted |
|
| 2005-05-24 | Notice of appearance, Chantal Masse, Rachel Ravary and Timothé Huot will be present at the hearing. | Stelco Inc. |
| 2005-05-19 | Book of authorities, (15 copies), Completed on: 2005-05-19 | Superintendent of Financial Services |
| 2005-05-19 | Intervener's factum, Completed on: 2005-05-19 | Superintendent of Financial Services |
| 2005-04-26 | Respondent's book of authorities, (Service to follow - Rec'd April 28, 2005), Completed on: 2005-04-28 | Stelco Inc. |
| 2005-04-26 | Respondent's factum, (Service to follow - Rec'd April 28, 2005), Completed on: 2005-04-28 | Stelco Inc. |
| 2005-04-26 | Respondent's record, (Service to follow - Rec'd April 28, 2005), Completed on: 2005-04-28 | Stelco Inc. |
| 2005-04-26 | Appeal perfected for hearing | |
| 2005-04-22 | Order on motion for leave to intervene, (BY CHARRON J.) | |
| 2005-04-22 |
Decision on the motion for leave to intervene, Cha, The motion for leave to intervene of the applicant, the Superintendent of Financial Services of Ontario, is granted and the applicant shall be entitled to serve and file a factum not to exceed 20 pages in length on or before May 20, 2005. The requests to present oral argument are deferred to a date following receipt and consideration of the written arguments of the parties and the intervener. The intervener shall not be entitled to raise new issues or to adduce further evidence or otherwise to supplement the record of the parties. Pursuant to Rule 59(1)(a) the intervener shall pay to the appellants and respondent any additional disbursements occasioned to the appellants and respondent by their intervention. Granted |
|
| 2005-04-22 | Submission of motion for leave to intervene, Cha | |
| 2005-04-05 | Response to the motion for leave to intervene, (Letter Form), from Chantal Masse dated Apr. 05/05, Completed on: 2005-04-05 | Stelco Inc. |
| 2005-04-04 | Response to the motion for leave to intervene, (Letter Form), from Claude Tardif dated Apr. 04/05, Completed on: 2005-04-04 | Francine Bourdon |
| 2005-03-24 | Motion for leave to intervene, (bookform), Incomplete | Superintendent of Financial Services |
| 2005-03-02 | Notice of hearing sent to parties | |
| 2005-03-02 |
Appeal hearing scheduled, 2005-06-10, (Previously June 7/05) Judgment rendered |
|
| 2005-03-01 | Appellant's book of authorities, (service coming - received March 7, 2005), Completed on: 2005-03-14 | Francine Bourdon |
| 2005-03-01 | Appellant's record, (Vol. I to III) - Service coming - received March 7, 2005., Completed on: 2005-03-14 | Francine Bourdon |
| 2005-03-01 | Appellant's factum, (Service coming - received March 7, 2005), Completed on: 2005-03-14 | Francine Bourdon |
| 2005-01-27 | Letter advising the parties of tentative hearing date and filing deadlines (Leave granted) | |
| 2004-12-17 | Notice of appeal, Completed on: 2004-12-17 | Francine Bourdon |
| 2004-12-03 | Appeal court record, (1 box - joint with Trial Court record) | |
| 2004-11-19 | Judgment on leave sent to the parties | |
| 2004-11-18 |
Judgment of the Court on the application for leave to appeal, The application for leave to appeal from the judgment of the Court of Appeal of Quebec (Montreal), Number 500-09-009876-004, dated March 1, 2004, is granted with costs to the applicants in any event of the cause. Granted, with costs to the applicant(s) in any event of the cause |
|
| 2004-09-07 | All materials on application for leave submitted to the Judges, Ba LeB De | |
| 2004-07-14 |
Decision on motion to extend time, to serve and file the respondent's response to June 30/04, DeRg Granted |
|
| 2004-07-14 | Submission of motion to extend time, DeRg | |
| 2004-06-30 | Response to motion to extend time, (Letter Form), from G. Lévesque dated May 25, 2004 (included in the motion), Completed on: 2004-06-30 | Francine Bourdon |
| 2004-06-30 | Motion to extend time, to file the response to June 30, 2004 (book foorm), Completed on: 2004-06-30 | Stelco Inc. |
| 2004-06-30 | Respondent's response on the application for leave to appeal, Completed on: 2004-06-30 | Stelco Inc. |
| 2004-05-27 | Letter acknowledging receipt of a complete application for leave to appeal | |
| 2004-05-26 | Correspondence received from, C. Baxter dated May 26, 2004 (fax copy) re: will be filing a response and extension by June 30, 2004 | Stelco Inc. |
| 2004-04-30 | Application for leave to appeal, (2 volumes)(errata in the reasons for judgment, new page 31 received on May 12, 2004 - corrections made), Completed on: 2004-05-27 | Francine Bourdon |
Parties
Please note that in the case of closed files, the “Status” column reflects the status of the parties at the time of the proceedings. For more information about the proceedings and about the dates when the file was open, please consult the docket of the case in question.
Main parties
| Name | Role | Status |
|---|---|---|
| Bourdon, Francine | Appellant | Active |
| Lise Chamberland, Gudrun Deumié, Yvon Laprade, Shirley Smith and Michel Tanguay | Appellant | Active |
v.
| Name | Role | Status |
|---|---|---|
| Stelco Inc. | Respondent | Active |
Other parties
| Name | Role | Status |
|---|---|---|
| Superintendent of Financial Services | Intervener | Active |
Counsel
Party: Bourdon, Francine
Counsel
Gaétan Lévesque
Stéphane Forest
7712, rue St-Hubert
Montréal, Quebec
H2R 2N8
Telephone: (514) 948-1888 Ext: 229
FAX: (514) 948-0772
Email: claudetardif@rivestschmidt.qc.ca
Agent
111, rue Champlain
Gatineau, Quebec
J8X 3R1
Telephone: (819) 771-7393
FAX: (819) 771-5397
Email: s.roussel@noelassocies.com
Party: Lise Chamberland, Gudrun Deumié, Yvon Laprade, Shirley Smith and Michel Tanguay
Counsel
Gaétan Lévesque
7712, rue St-Hubert
Montréal, Quebec
H2R 2N8
Telephone: (514) 948-1888 Ext: 229
FAX: (514) 948-0772
Email: claudetardif@rivestschmidt.qc.ca
Agent
111, rue Champlain
Gatineau, Quebec
J8X 3R1
Telephone: (819) 771-7393
FAX: (819) 771-5397
Email: s.roussel@noelassocies.com
Party: Stelco Inc.
Counsel
Timothé R. Huot
Rachel Ravary
1170 Peel Street, 4th Floor
Montreal, Quebec
H3B 4S8
Telephone: (514) 397-4280
FAX: (514) 875-6246
Agent
1400 - 40 Elgin Street
Ottawa, Ontario
K1P 5K6
Telephone: (613) 238-2000
FAX: (613) 563-9386
Email: cbaxter@mccarthy.ca
Party: Superintendent of Financial Services
Counsel
Financial Services Commission of Ontario
5160 Yonge Street, 17th Floor
Toronto, Ontario
M2N 6L9
Telephone: (416) 226-7764
FAX: (416) 590-7070
Agent
70 Gloucester Street
Ottawa, Ontario
K2P 0A2
Telephone: (613) 566-2058
FAX: (613) 235-4430
Email: rhouston@burkerobertson.com
Summary
Keywords
None.
Summary
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.
The Respondent owned factories and offices in several provinces and had its head office in Ontario. Its employees had a pension plan. A memorandum of mutual agreement provided that the plan was governed by the Ontario authorities. The Appellants were employees of the Respondent. They worked only in Quebec, with the exception of Michel Tanguay, who also worked in Ontario and Nova Scotia.
In 1990, the Respondent shut down three factories in Quebec. In March 1992, a group of employees who had been denied benefits obtained an order of the Superintendent of Pensions for Ontario that the plan be wound up in part. The decision became final in 1996 when the Supreme Court of Canada refused leave to appeal from a judgment of the Ontario Court of Appeal. The order applied to all the Appellants.
Further to the order, the Respondent submitted to the Superintendent a report on how to effect the wind-up. For the purpose of determining the benefits, the report differentiated between members from Ontario, Alberta and Quebec. The law of Quebec would apply to the Appellants. On January 29, 1997, the Superintendent approved the report.
The Appellants then applied to the Superior Court to have s. 74 of Ontario's Pension Benefits Act apply to them and to have the Respondent pay them amounts ranging from $13,690 to $132,389 in addition to what they had already been paid pursuant to Quebec's Supplemental Pension Plans Act, R.S.Q., c. R-15.1. The Respondent raised two objections: (1) that the Superior Court lacked jurisdiction to hear the case and (2) that s. 74 did not apply to the Appellants, since they were not Ontario residents.
On June 20, 2000, the Superior Court found that it did have jurisdiction but dismissed the Appellants' action on the basis that s. 74 did not apply to them. On March 1, 2004, the Court of Appeal dismissed the Appellants' appeal; Morin J.A. dissented on the issue of jurisdiction, while Robert C.J.Q. dissented on the merits.
Lower court rulings
Superior Court of Quebec
505-17-000410-987
Action des appelants rejetée
Court of Appeal of Quebec (Montréal)
500-09-009876-004
Appel rejeté
Filed documents
The memorandums of argument on an application for leave to appeal will be posted here 30 days after leave to appeal has been granted unless they contain personal information, information that is subject to a publication ban, or any other information that is not part of the public record. You may also obtain copies of the memorandum by filling out the Request for Court records form or by contacting the Court’s Records Centre either by email at records-dossiers@scc-csc.ca or by telephone at 613‑996‑7933 or at 1‑888‑551‑1185.
If you have questions about a memorandum of argument or want to use a memorandum of argument, please contact the author of the memorandum of argument directly. Their name appears at the end of the memorandum of argument. The contact information for counsel is found in the “Counsel” tab of this page.
Downloadable PDFs
Not available
Related links
The factums of the appellant, the respondent and the intervener will be posted here at least 2 weeks before the hearing unless they contain personal information, information that is subject to a publication ban, or any other information that is not part of the public record. You may also obtain copies of factums by filling out the Request for Court records form or by contacting the Court’s Records Centre either by email at records-dossiers@scc-csc.ca or by telephone at 613‑996‑7933 or at 1‑888‑551‑1185.
If you have questions about a factum or want permission to use a factum, please contact the author of the factum directly. Their contact information appears on the first page of each factum.
Downloadable PDFs
Not available
Related links
The condensed books of the appellant, the respondent and the intervener will be posted here upon receipt of the electronic version, 2 days prior to the scheduled appeal hearing. You may also obtain copies of condensed books by filling out the Request for Court records form or by contacting the Court’s Records Centre either by email at records-dossiers@scc-csc.ca or by telephone at 613‑996‑7933 or at 1‑888‑551‑1185.
If you have questions about a condensed book or want permission to use a condensed book, please contact the author of the condensed book directly. Their contact information appears on the first page of each condensed book.
Downloadable PDFs
Not available