On September 30, 2104, the Minister of Justice introduced
Bill n°14: An Act to amend the Code of Civil Procedure and
other provisions seeking principally to increase the ceiling
of the jurisdiction of the Small Claims Division of the Court of
Quebec from $7,000 to $15,000, and diminishing accordingly the
jurisdiction of the Court of Quebec.
This amendment more than doubles the limit amount for claims
that can be instituted before that Tribunal.
Despite this increase, Bill no. 14 does not modify the rules
pertaining to the representation of parties before the Small Claims
Division of the Court of Quebec. Consequently, the parties, both
physical and legal persons, still have to represent themselves
without representation by counsel, unless the case raises a complex
legal issue and with the consent of the chief judge of the Court of
As a reminder, a claim before the Small Claims Division of the
Court of Quebec can only be instituted by a physical person or a
legal person, a partnership or an association only if, at all times
during the 12-month period preceding the claim, it had no more than
five persons under its direction or control resulting from a
contract of employment.2 A physical or legal person
facing a small claim cannot seek a transfer before another
The Minister of Justice has mentioned that Bill no. 14 could
enter into force on January 1, 2015, if the legislative agenda
On October 7, 2014, Bill no. 14 was adopted in principle by the
1 Code of Civil Procedure, Article
2 Code of Civil Procedure, Article
The content of this article is intended to provide a general
guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought
about your specific circumstances.
To print this article, all you need is to be registered on Mondaq.com.
Click to Login as an existing user or Register so you can print this article.
It's not often that our little blog intersects with such titanic struggles as the U.S. presidential race – and by using the term "titanic" I certainly don't mean to suggest that anything disastrous is in the future.
J.J. v. C.C., is an interesting case in which the court held that an automotive garage owes a duty to minor children to secure the vehicles on the premises by locking the cars and safely storing the car keys...
In Irwin v. Alberta Veterinary Medical Association, 2015 ABCA 396, the Alberta Court of Appeal found that the "ABVMA" failed to afford procedural fairness to a veterinarian undergoing an incapacity assessment.
Register for Access and our Free Biweekly Alert for
This service is completely free. Access 250,000 archived articles from 100+ countries and get a personalised email twice a week covering developments (and yes, our lawyers like to think you’ve read our Disclaimer).