2023 QCCA 1164, 2023 QCCA 1164

Shaulov c. Shaulov 2023 QCCA 1164 COURT OF APPEAL CANADA PROVINCE OF QUEBEC REGISTRY OF MONTREAL No: 500-09-700176-233 (540-17-015234-239) DATE: September 15, 2023 BEFORE THE HONOURABLE GUY COURNOYER, J.A. ALEXANDER SHAULOV, acting in his personal capacity ALEXANDER SHAULOV, acting as duly authorized representative of his mother and father Mordechai Shaulov and Stella Iliaeva Shaulov under a Power of Attorney MORDECHAI SHAULOV STELLA ILIAEVA SHAULOV DAVID SHAULOV FAMILY TRUST APPLICANTS – Plaintiffs v. DAVID SHAULOV GLEYDCIANE “CIANE” ALEXANDRE FERNANDES FRONTLINE ACCOUNTING SOLUTIONS LTD.

RESPONDENTS – Defendants and OFFICIER DE LA PUBLICITÉ DES DROITS DE LA CIRCONSCRIPTION FONCIÈRE DE LAVAL IMPLEADED PARTY – Impleaded party JUDGMENT [ 1 ] The Applicant, Mr. Alexander Shaulov, seeks leave to appeal de bene esse from a judgment rendered in the course of proceedings by the Superior Court of Québec (the Honourable Mr. Justice Enrico Forlini of the District of Laval) [1] . [ 2 ] The Applicant contends that

article 492 of the Code of Civil Procedure [2] – which provides that a defendant may request an order for suretyship be made where a plaintiff is domiciled outside of the Province of Québec – does not apply to him. Notwithstanding the admission that he is, in fact, domiciled outside of the Province of Québec, he nonetheless argues that a person possessing power of attorney does not fall within the scope of the term “plaintiff” as contemplated by

article 492 C.C.P. [ 3 ] The Applicant raised several discrete arguments in his oral submissions. [ 4 ] Firstly, he argues that he has insufficient standing to be considered a plaintiff. In his opinion, the Superior Court erred in ruling that the following indicia were sufficient to conclude that the Applicant was an “instigator” of the legal proceedings and that he could therefore be considered a plaintiff: power of attorney, administration of his parents’ property, and the ability to sue ( ester en justice ) as their legal representative [3] . [ 5 ] Secondly, he further contends that even if were he to fall within the scope of the definition contemplated at

article 492 C.C.P. , he would nonetheless be subject to the exclusionary rule that is provided for at

article 493 C.P.P. , as the current proceedings “relate to family matters”. [ 6 ] Thirdly, notwithstanding the Applicant’s admission that representations were made on his behalf during the Superior Court proceedings, he affirms that he has nevertheless been denied procedural fairness, specifically that he was denied the opportunity to be heard personally ( audi alteram partem ). [ 7 ] Finally, the Applicant alleges that the order made pursuant to

article 492 C.P.P. violates his

section 7 Charter right. While he claims that he does not seek to impugn the constitutionality of the

article itself, he argues that the Supreme Court of Canada’s holdings in Lac d'Amiante du Québec [4] and Godbout [5] preclude a court from making an order on the basis of the Applicant’s domicile, i.e., precisely the situation provided for by

article 492 C.P.P. [ 8 ] The Application does not raise any issues pertaining to a particular aggravated hardship that goes beyond the private interests of the parties, and which warrants the Court’s attention. The Application judge exercised his discretion in ordering a suretyship and, as such, it is not lightly that an appellate court will intervene [6] . The present case does not require the Court’s intervention. [ 9 ] In closing, it would be remiss of this Court not to convey its concerns, as stated at the hearing, that if the parties do not wish to

squander money on extravagant and gratuitous legal costs, they should consider requesting a settlement conference before the Superior Court or explore any other reasonable alternative. FOR THESE REASONS, THE UNDERSIGNED: [ 10 ] DENIES the Application de bene esse for leave to appeal from a judgment rendered in the course of the proceedings; [ 11 ] DENIES the Applicant Alexander Shaulov’s urgent Application for stay of execution of judgment rendered in the course of the proceedings; [ 12 ] THE WHOLE , with legal costs. GUY COURNOYER, J.A.

Alexander Shaulov Unrepresented Mtre Reevin Pearl PEARL & ASSOCIÉS For Mordechai Shaulov, Stella Iliaeva Shaulov and David Shaulov Family Trust Mtre Anthony Gattuso Mtre Anas Qiabi GATTUSO BOUCHARD MAZZONE For David Shaulov, Gleydciane “Ciane” Alexandre Fernandes and Frontline Accounting Solutions Inc. Date of hearing: September 1, 2023