Renaud v. Quebec (Commission des affaires sociales), [1999] 3 SCR 855

Renaud v. Quebec (Commission des affaires sociales), [1999] 3 S.C.R. 855

Sylvie Renaud                                                                                    Appellant

v.

The Commission des affaires sociales,

the Société de l’assurance automobile du Québec

and the Administrative Tribunal of Québec                                     Respondents

Indexed as:  Renaud v. Quebec (Commission des affaires sociales) 

File No.:  26677.

1999:  December 8.

Present:  L’Heureux‑Dubé, Gonthier, McLachlin, Iacobucci, Bastarache, Binnie and Arbour JJ.

on appeal from the court of appeal for quebec

Administrative law -- Judicial review -- Patently unreasonable error -- Definition of “spouses” -- Applicant’s claim for compensation refused by Société de l’assurance automobile du Québec -- Commission des affaires sociales dismissing applicant’s appeal and application for review -- Decisions found to be patently unreasonable since on the evidence applicant met requirements of definition of “spouses” in s. 1(7)(b) of Automobile Insurance Act, R.S.Q., c. A‑25.

Statutes and Regulations Cited

Automobile Insurance Act, R.S.Q., c. A-25, s. 1(7)(b) “spouses”.

Civil Code of Lower Canada, art. 1078.1.

APPEAL from a judgment of the Quebec Court of Appeal, J.E. 98-882, [1998] Q.J. No. 941 (QL), affirming a judgment of the Superior Court, [1997] Q.J. No. 102 (QL).  Appeal allowed.

Jérôme Choquette, Q.C., and Camille Bolte, for the appellant.

Manon Touchette, for the respondent the Société de l’assurance automobile du Québec.

Luce Therrien, for the respondent the Administrative Tribunal of Québec.

English version of the judgment of the Court delivered orally by

1                                   Bastarache J. -- We are of the view that the evidence in the record as a whole makes it impossible to arrive at any other conclusion than that the appellant meets the requirements of the definition of “spouses” in s. 1(7)(b) of the Quebec Automobile Insurance Act.  The appeal is therefore allowed on the ground that the decisions of the Commission des affaires sociales of February 16, 1993 and February 14, 1996 are patently unreasonable.

2                                   Consequently, the decision of the Quebec Court of Appeal is set aside and the above-mentioned decisions of the Commission des affaires sociales are quashed.

3                                   In view of the exceptional circumstances of this case, the Court is rendering the decision that should have been rendered by the Commission des affaires sociales and orders the Société de l’assurance automobile du Québec to pay the compensation provided for in the Automobile Insurance Act and the additional indemnity provided for in art. 1078.1 of the Civil Code of Lower Canada, with interest from July 22, 1989, the whole with costs against the respondents in this Court and in the courts below^*.

Judgment accordingly.

Solicitors for the appellant:  Choquette Beaupré Rhéaume, Montréal.

Solicitors for the respondent the Société de l’assurance automobile du Québec:  Gélinas & Associés, Montréal.

Solicitors for the respondent the Administrative Tribunal of Québec:  Lemieux, Chrétien, Lahaye & Corriveau, Montréal.