2016 QCCA 315, 2016 QCCA 315

Norsah c. Commission des droits de la personne et des droits de la jeunesse 2016 QCCA 315 COURT OF APPEAL CANADA PROVINCE OF QUEBEC REGISTRY OF MONTREAL No: 500-09-025855-164 (500-17-085303-140) MINUTES OF HEARING DATE : February 19, 2016 THE HONOURABLE MARIE-FRANCE BICH, J.A. APPELLANT ATTORNEY KOFI NORSAH Mtre MAY SAU MEI CHIU (Ouellet Nadon et Associées) RESPONDENT ATTORNEY COMMISSION DES DROITS DE LA PERSONNE ET DES DROITS DE LA JEUNESSE Mtre ATHANASSIA BITZAKIDIS (Commission des droits de la personne et des droits de la jeunesse) IMPLEADED PARTIES ATTORNEY SAINT COLUMBA HOUSE PATRICIA LISSON Mtre PIERRE ST-ONGE (Dunton, Rainville)

DESCRIPTION : Application for leave to appeal a judgment rendered on December 21, 2015 by the Honourable Madam Justice Danielle Mayrand of the Superior Court, district of Montreal. (Articles 30 and 357 C.c.p.) Clerk : Mihary Andrianaivo Courtroom : RC-18 HEARING 9:27 Beginning of the hearing. Discussions between the Judge and Mr. Norsah. Mr. Norsah tells the Court that his attorney, Mtre Chiu, has other commitments preventing her from being present today. Mr. Norsah then asks for the adjournment of the hearing.

The Judge requests Mtre Chiu's presence and instructs the Clerk of the Court to contact her. 9:28 Recess. 9:29 Resumption of the hearing. Discussions between the Judge and Mr. Norsah. The Judge invites Mr. Norsah and the other parties to try to contact Mtre Chiu. Recess. 11:00 Resumption of the hearing. Mtre Chiu is present. Discussions between the Judge and Mtre Chiu.

Mtre Chiu prays the Court to postpone the hearing of the application for leave to appeal. 11:04 Submissions by Mtre Bitzakidis. 11:06 Submissions by Mtre St-Onge. 11:07 Additional submissions by Mtre Chiu. 11:08 BY THE JUDGE : Ruling on Mtre Chiu’s verbal motion for postponement of the hearing of the application for leave to appeal. – See page 3. End of the hearing. Mihary Andrianaivo Clerk BY THE JUDGE

JUDGMENT [ 1 ] The applicant is represented by a new lawyer, Mtre Chiu, who is not yet familiar with the file and is unable to present arguments in support of her client's application for leave to appeal the judgment rendered by the Superior Court on December 21, 2015, which was supposed to be heard today. Mtre Chiu therefore asks for the postponement of the hearing.

Counsel for the respondent and impleaded parties oppose the request. [ 2 ] Despite the fact that it was asked for at the very last minute, contrary to the rules of the Court, the postponement will be granted in view of the reasons explained by the applicant's lawyer in support thereof. [ 3 ] In another respect, parties and counsel are hereby advised that, at this hearing, the following questions will also be raised: 1° The judgment of the Superior Court being dated December 21, 2015, is the right of appeal or right to ask for leave to appeal of the applicant governed by the former Code of Civil Procedure (CQLR, c.

C-25) or the new Code of Civil Procedure (CQLR, c. C-25.01)? 2° Although its heading refers to art. 846 C.C.P. , is the action instituted by the applicant against the respondent and mises en cause governed by said provision of the former Code of Civil Procedure or by art. 33 of this Code ? FOR THESE REASONS, [ 4 ] The verbal motion for postponement of the hearing is granted ; [ 5 ] The hearing of the application for leave to appeal is POSTPONED to March 21, 2016 , in room RC.18, at 9:30 AM; [ 6 ] Legal costs to follow suit. marie-france bich , J.A.