Financial protection in case of judicial proceedings for Municipal Council members and Officers. Me Yvon Denault

Transcription

1 Financial protection in case of judicial proceedings for Municipal Council members and Officers Me Yvon Denault

2 INTRODUCTION 2

3 History and origin of present scheme protecting against financial losses related to the performance of municipal duties Increase in the number of legal proceedings involving council members Preamble of the law Bill 24 of 1996 and comments of Minister Chevrette In force on June 20,

4 PROTECTION SCHEME PARAMETERS 4

5 WHO? Council members Officers and employees of the municipality Officers and employees of a mandatory body of the municipality Art par. 1 (2 o ) C.T.A. and par. 1 (2 o ) M.C. 5

6 WHEN? The person is: defendant respondent accused person impleaded In judicial proceedings brought before a court By reason of an alleged act omission In the performance of his municipal duties 6

7 Art par. 1 (2 o ) C.T.A. and par. 1 (2 o ) M.C. - Girard c. Québec (PG) 2007 QCCS Bellefeuille c. L Assomption (Ville de), 2016 QCCQ Boulanger c. Ville de Varennes, 2004 CANLII J.C. Gingras c. C.M.Q., judge Sylvain Provencher, j.c.s., August 23,

8 HOW? The municipality must assume the defence or representation of the person concerned: the protection is immediate and automatic. The person may assume, himself or through an attorney of his choice, his defence or representation. The municipality must then pay or reimburse any reasonable costs incurred. Art par. 1 and 2 C.T.A. and par. 1 and 2 M.C. Auger c. Pavone, REJB *Bellefeuille c. L Assomption (Ville de), 2016 QCCQ 4440 (in appeal) 8

9 THE REASONABLENESS TEST (translation) (par. 81) Article C.T.A. gives Gingras the right to hire an attorney of his choice. However, this right remains subject to the reasonableness test. (par. 82) The court concludes that it was unreasonable to require the Town to pay the cost of second attorney for Gingras in such circumstances before the CMQ. (par. 83) The Court considers that this does not meet the reasonableness test. *Bellefeuille c. L Assomption (Ville de), 2016 QCCQ 4440 (in appeal) 9

10 LIMITS TO THE OBLIGATION TO DEFEND 10

11 LIMITS Renunciation in writing Art par. 3 C.T.A. and par. 3 M.C. Final judgment Art par. 2 C.T.A. and par 2 M.C. Admission Art par. 2 C.T.A. and par 2 M.C. The beneficiary must show that he meets the requirements set out in the bylaw - Berniquez St-Jean c. Boisbriand (Ville de), 2012 QCCS

12 IMPORTANCE OF MUNCIPALITY S INTERVENTION 12

13 WHEN? During or after the legal proceedings involving the person claiming the reimbursement of legal expenses Art C.T.A. and M.C. 13

14 OBJECTIVE OF INTERVENTION To ensure that the conditions allowing the protection scheme to apply are complied with. To limit the costs and Court proceedings. To allow the judge to deliver judgment not only on the main procedure but also on a possible obligation of the defendant to reimburse the municipality, in other words, to require the judge to qualify the conduct of the person benefiting from the protection scheme. 14

15 INTERVENTION NOW POSSIBLE UPSTREAM IN THE PROCESS RATHER THAN AN AUTOMATIC APPLICATION OF THE PROTECTION SCHEME (par. 53) Certes, la LCV, à l article 604.7, prévoit le remboursement en tout ou en partie, au choix de la municipalité, des frais de défense dans certains cas. Ainsi, la municipalité peut demander, sans être tenue de le faire, d être remboursée si l élu ou le fonctionnaire, accusé dans une procédure pénale ou criminelle, est déclaré coupable et n a aucun motif raisonnable de croire que sa conduit était conforme à la loi. Le conseil municipal exerce alors un choix à l aval du processus. Mais là où le jugement et l arrêt Berniquez St-Jean innovent, c est qu ils mettent un terme à la règle d automatisme et permettent au conseil municipal d exercer dans certains cas un droit de regard à l amont du processus avant d engager des frais. Mailot c. Montréal (Ville de), 2014 QCCS

16 THE OBLIGATION TO REIMBURSE When it applies 16

17 GROSS OR INTENTIONAL FAULT OR FAULT SEPARABLE FROM THE PERFORMANCE OF THE DUTIES Art par. 1 (1 o ) and par. 1 (1 o ) C.T.A. Finality and relevance criteria Mailhot c. Montréal (Ville de), 2014 QCCS 2803 Berniquez St-Jean c. Boisbriand (Ville de), 2016 QCCS 2197, 2012 QCCS 2369 Normétal (Municipalité de) c. Dickey, 2017 QCCQ

18 PROCEEDING BROUGHT BEFORE THE COURT BY THE MUNICIPALTY OR BY A THIRD PARTY AT THE REQUEST OF THE MUNICIPALITY Art par. 1 (2 o ) C.T.A. and par. 1 (2 o ) M.C. 18

19 PERSON CONVICTED IN PENAL OR CRIMINAL PROCEEDINGS WITH NO REASONABLE GROUNDS TO BELIEVE HE ACTED WITHIN THE LAW Art par. 1 (3 o ) C.T.A. and par. 1 (3 o ) M.C. Mailhot c. Montréal (Ville de), 2014 QCCS 3803 Berniquez St-Jean c. Boisbriand (Ville de), 2016 QCCA 2197, 2012 QCCS

20 OBLIGATION TO REIMBURSE The applicable criteria 20

21 PERSON ENTITLED TO REASONABLE PROTECTION Art par. 1 (1 o ) C.T.A. and par. 1 (1 o ) M.C. 21

22 THE FUNDS OF A MUNICIPALITY MUST NOT BE USED TO PROTECT A PERSON AGAINST FINANCIAL LOSSES RESULTING FROM MISCONDUCT WHICH CANNOT POSSIBLY BE COMPARED WITH THE ERRORS THAT MAY REASONABLY BE EXPECTED TO BE COMMITTED BY A PERSON PERFORMING SIMILAR DUTIES Art par. 1 (2 o ) C.T.A. and par. 1 (2 o ) M.C. 22

23 IF WHAT WAS DONE WAS NOT IN THE PUBLIC INTEREST, THEN THE PROTECTION SCHEME SHOULD NOT APPLY (translation) Berniquez St-Jean c. Boisbriand (Ville de), 2012 QCCS

24 THE ADVANTAGE FOR THE MUNICIPALTY OF WITHDRAWING WHEN IT SUSPECTS GROSS OR INTENTIONAL FAULT OR A FAULT SEPARABLE FROM THE PERFORMANCE OF THE DUTIES Art C.T.A. and M.C. 24

25 POSSIBILITY OF INCREASING COVERAGE BY BY-LAW 25

26 FEATURE OF BY-LAW Material loss in the performance of duties Identification of circumstances giving rise to the payment Amount of indemnity or manner of computing this amount Time limit for filing an application Council resolution required Art C.T.A. and M.C. Carignan c. Deschamps, J.E (C.S.), REJB Clairoux c. Pontiac (Municipalité de), J.E (C.Q.), REJB