2022 QCCA 1196, 2022 QCCA 1196

Smith c. Town of Hudson 2022 QCCA 1196 COURT OF APPEAL CANADA PROVINCE OF QUEBEC REGISTRY OF MONTREAL No.: 500-09-030167-225 ( 760-17-005507-192 ) MINUTES OF HEARING DATE: September 1, 2022 THE HONOURABLE PETER KALICHMAN, J.A. APPLICANT COUNSEL Trevor Smith Mtre Jamie Benizri ( Legal Logik ) Absent RESPONDENT COUNSEL Town of Hudson Mtre Simon Vincent ( Bélanger, Sauvé ) Absent IMPLEADED PARTY COUNSEL The Attorney General of Quebec ABSENT AND UNREPRESENTED DESCRIPTION: Application for leave to appeal from a judgment terminating the proceeding rendered on July 14, 2022 by the Honourable Christian J.

Brossard of the Superior Court , District of Beauharnois . Clerk at the hearing : Ariane Simard-Trudel Courtroom: RC-18 HEARING

9:29 Commencement of the hearing. Continuation of the hearing held on August 31, 2022. The parties were excused from appearing in Court. BY THE JUDGE : Judgement – see page 3. Conclusion of the hearing. Ariane Simard-Trudel, Clerk at the hearing JUDGMENT [ 1 ] The Applicant, Mr. Smith, seeks to appeal from a judgment rendered on July 14, 2022 by the Superior Court (the Honorable Christian J. Brossard) dismissing his application for a declaration of constitutional exemption and for damages. [ 2 ] The Applicant made a motion for permission to appeal but, in my view, leave is not required.

It is true that the amount of damages claimed by the Applicant is below the threshold for an appeal of right, but the principal subject of his claim in first instance was declaratory in nature. [1] As a result, the judgment dismissing his application terminated a proceeding and can be appealed of right according to

article 30 of the Code of Civil Procedure . [ 3 ] Since the appeal could have been initiated solely by filing a notice of appeal, I take note of the filing of the Applicant's notice of appeal which is deemed to have been filed on this date. [ 4 ] The parties propose that they each set out their arguments in regards to a possible incidental appeal within the briefs and memorandums that they will file in the principal appeal and ask me to give effect to that agreement. However, without the actual incidental appeal, I am not convinced that this would be an appropriate exercise of my powers under

article 367 C.p.c ., not to mention the fact that the arrangement they propose would require the Appellant to respond to an incidental appeal that he has not yet seen. FOR THESE REASONS, THE UNDERSIGNED: [ 5 ] DECLARES that the appeal is of right and TAKES NOTE of the filing of the notice of appeal; [ 6 ] DECLARES that the motion for permission to appeal is moot ( sans objet ); [ 7 ] Without legal costs. PETER KALICHMAN, J.A.