2023 QCCQ 5842, 2023 QCCQ 5842

Almeida Marlow c. Tribunal administratif du Québec 2023 QCCQ 5842 COURT OF QUÉBEC « Appeal and administrative division» CANADA PROVINCE OF QUÉBEC DISTRICT OF JOLIETTE N° : 705-80-005883-232 DATE : August 11, 2023 ______________________________________________________________________ PRESIDED BY JUSTICE PATRICK CHOQUETTE, J.C.Q. ______________________________________________________________________ FLORA ALMEIDA MARLOW APPELANT c.

TRIBUNAL ADMINISTRATIF DU QUÉBEC RESPONDENT ______________________________________________________________________ JUDGMENT ON DECLINATORY EXCEPTION ON THE APPLICATION FOR LEAVE TO APPEAL. (Article 159 of the Act on administrative justice [1] ) ______________________________________________________________________ INTRODUCTION [ 1 ] Flora Almeida Marlow (Mrs. Marlow) is seeking leave to appeal of three (3) decisions of the Tribunal administratif du Québec (TAQ),

section des affaires économiques rendered on February 17, 2020 (decision 1), July 31, 2020 (decision 2) and June 8, 2022 (decision 3). [ 2 ] The TAQ submits a preliminary motion to dismiss the matter on grounds of absence of jurisdiction and the inexistence of a right of appeal. CONTEXT [ 3 ] The factual background revolves around Mrs.

Marlow’s quest to give effect to the last will and testament of the late Kenneth Random against what she considers illegal acts posed by Raoul Lincourt and conflict of interest in his capacity of liquidator of the estate of the late Kenneth Random and his function of president of La Randonnée Paysagère en souvenance de Robbie Cantley et de ses frères d’armes (La Randonnée). [ 4 ] According to Mrs.

Marlow, the conduct of other parties is aimed at obtaining control over real estate property in which La Randonnée owns interests, the precise nature thereof not having been disclosed to the Tribunal. [ 5 ] These proceedings were triggered by the decision rendered on May 23, 2019 by the Registraire des Entreprises (le Registraire) to annul 4 current update declarations filed on behalf of la Randonnée by Mrs.

Marlow and confirm the annual declaration of August 11, 2017 and current update declaration of March 14, 2018 filed on behalf of La Radonnée by Raoul Lincourt. [ 6 ] The effect of the Registraire’s decision is that Mrs. Marlow is no longer president of La Randonnée. [ 7 ] In Decision 1, the TAQ,

section des affaires, dismisses the recourse introduced by Mrs. Marlow and maintains the Registraire’s decision. The TAQ also writes that Mrs. Marlow was not addressing the proper jurisdiction to contest the legality of decisions taken by the board of directors of La Randonnée [2] [ 8 ] Decision 2 by the TAQ,

section des affaires économiques dismisses Mrs. Marlow appeal/revision of Decision 1 following La Randonnée motion to dismiss. According to Decision 2, no such recourse lies with the TAQ under the AAJ. [ 9 ] In parallel, Cathal Marlow, also a former director of La Randonnée also contests the Registraire’s decision of May 23, 2019.

In May 2021, the Registraire dismisses Cathal Marlow’s recourse following Randonnée’s petition to dismiss on the grounds of res judicata with Decision 1 and Decision 2 that already disposed of the matter. [ 10 ] Cathal Marlow files a recourse before the TAQ seeking the annulment of the later decision of the Registraire. Decision 3 is rendered following La Randonnée’s motion to dismiss. The TAQ,

section des affaires économiques declares that Cathal Marlow’s recourse lacks any legal foundation and is abusive [3] .

QUESTIONS IN ISSUE

a) Does a right of appeal exist concerning Decisions 1, 2 and 3?

b) Does the Court of Québec have jurisdiction over the dispute? ANALYSIS [ 11 ] As explained to Mrs. Marlow during the hearing, the Court of Québec, although a court of law of the judicial order, may only exercise its jurisdiction over the matters specifically provided by the law. It is a statutory Tribunal. [ 12 ] In her application for leave to appeal she asks that this Court nullifies the TAQ decisions. Her conclusions read as follows: 1. To receive this present request to nullify the TAQ decisions. 2.

To fix a date for the process to nullify the Decision that was based on an illegal mandate, and fraudulent documents from the Corporation [4] . 3. To claim expenses and damages from the TAQ who have defamed, bullied, tortured, been racist towards me for all these years. 4. To reopen this case and verify fundamental documents & resolutions, mandates, procedures giving powers to Mr. Raoul Lincourt & their Lawyers powers in this case. To demand independent investigation. 5. To verify all documents, resolutions, contracts of the Ville de Mascouche (Government Bodies) & their involvement in this case. 6.

To verify the documents of other extremely High Profiles groups involved with the Political involvement in this case. 7. To make the TAQ & others responsible for their own expenses & and all related expenses. [ 13 ] The TAQ submits that there is no right of appeal to the Court of Quebec of a decision rendered by the

section des affaires économiques. The Tribunal agrees. [ 14 ]

Article 159 of the AAJ reads as follows: 159. An appeal lies to the Court of Québec, irrespective of the amount involved, from decisions rendered by the Tribunal in matters heard by the immovable property division, and from decisions rendered in matters concerning the preservation of agricultural land, with leave of a judge, where the matter at issue is one which ought to be submitted to the Court of Québec. [ 15 ] The appeal to the Court of Québec is only possible for matters from the immovable property division and matters concerning the preservation of agricultural land of the TAQ. [ 16 ] The AAJ does not provide for the possibility of an appeal of decisions from the

section des affaires économiques of the TAQ. Such decisions are final [5] . [ 17 ] Unfortunately for Mrs. Marlow, she has been knocking at the wrong door from the onset and now again. [ 18 ] The Court of Québec does not have jurisdiction over the matter and no right of appeal lies with respect to Decisions 1, 2 and 3 of the

section des affaires économiques of the TAQ. FOR THESE REASONS, THE COURT : [ 19 ] GRANTS respondant’s declinatory exception; [ 20 ] DISMISS Flora Almeida Marlow’s application for leave to appeal; [ 21 ] WITHOUT costs. __________________________________ PATRICK CHOQUETTE, J.C.Q. Flora Almeida Malrlow Personally

Me Joëlle Bitton Baril & Avocats For the Tribunal administratif du Québec Date of hearing : June 28, 2023