2013 QCCA 420, 2013 QCCA 420

Liu c. McGill University Non-Academic Certified Association (MUNACA) 2013 QCCA 420 COURT OF APPEAL CANADA PROVINCE OF QUEBEC REGISTRY OF MONTREAL No: 500-09-023380-132 ( 500-17-074065-122 ) MINUTES OF THE HEARING DATE: March 11, 2013 THE HONOURABLE YVES-MARIE MORISSETTE, J.A. PETITIONER ATTORNEY JISHENG LIU In person RESPONDENT ATTORNEY McGILL UNIVERSITY NON-ACADEMIC CERTIFIED ASSOCIATION (MUNACA) Me Sibel Ataogul MELANÇON MARCEAU GRENIER & SCIORTINO

MOTION FOR LEAVE TO APPEAL FROM A JUDGMENT RENDERED ON FEBRUARY 18, 2013, BY THE HON. STEPHANE SANSFAÇON OF THE SUPERIOR COURT, DISTRICT OF MONTREAL Clerk: Bertrand Gervais Court Room: RC.18 HEARING 14:01 Commencement of the hearing. 14:01 The judge talks to Mr Liu. 14:10 Submission by Mr. Liu. 14:12 Suspension. The judgement will be render later today and will be communicate to the parties by the clerk. BY THE JUDGE. Judgment – See page 3. Bertrand Gervais Clerk JUDGMENT [ 1 ] The petitioner, who brought a motion for declaratory judgment in the Superior Court, was seeking an

interpretation of an agreement between himself and his former union regarding the conditions under which a grievance in which he was involved as grievor would proceed to arbitration. On its face, this agreement appears to be a transaction within the meaning of

article 2631 C.c.Q. [ 2 ] The respondent raised an exception to dismiss, on the basis of which the Superior Court dismissed the petitioner’s motion. Two grounds were relied upon by the motions judge: (

i) the dispute between the parties being in essence whether the respondent had fulfilled its duties towards the petitioner under

section 47.2 of the Labour Code , the Court was without jurisdiction, as the matter fell squarely within the jurisdiction of the competent tribunal, namely the Commission des relations du travail (the CRT ), and

(ii) by its decision of May 30 th , 2012, the CRT had already dealt with the dispute between the parties on its merits, which entailed that, pursuant to

article 2848 of the Civil code of Quebec , res judicata precluded any further litigation between these parties on those facts. [ 3 ] The judgment of the Superior Court grants an exception to dismiss. It is a final judgment of that court, within the meaning of subparagraph (1) of the first paragraph of

article 26 C.c.p. , and as such it is appealable as of right (a right which, need I mention it, exists quite independently of the merit of the appeal). [ 4 ] I am informed by the petitioner that he has not filed an inscription. That however does not pose a difficulty from his point of view for the judgement he seeks to have overturned was rendered on February 18 th , 2013. [ 5 ] As matters stand, I do not have jurisdiction to grant leave to appeal for leave to appeal is unnecessary. FOR THESE REASONS: [ 6 ] The motion is therefore dismissed; as the respondent does not waive its costs, it will be entitled to them. YVES-MARIE MORISSETTE, J.A.