2013 QCCA 1414, 2013 QCCA 1414

D.B. c. M.B. 2013 QCCA 1414 COURT OF APPEAL CANADA PROVINCE OF QUEBEC REGISTRY OF MONTREAL No: 500-09-023139-124 (500-14-040437-121) DATE: AUGUST 16, 2013 PRESIDING: THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ALLAN R. HILTON D. B. APPELLANT / PETITIONER - Respondent v. M. B. RESPONDENT / RESPONDENT - Plaintiff and J. B. Impleaded Party and PUBLIC CURATOR OF QUEBEC IMPLEADED PARTY / RESPONDENT - Impleaded Party JUDGMENT [ 1 ] The application of the respondent M. B. under

article 475 C.C.P . with which I am seized seeks the correction of a paragraph in my reasons for judgment rendered on July 31, 2013 [1] which, if corrected, would not alter the outcome of that judgment dismissing the petitioner's application for a stay of proceedings pursuant to subsection 66(2) of the Supreme Court Act [2] and articles 485, 497 and 547 C.C.P. Accordingly, it is unnecessary to remove the words "and property" from paragraph [7] of my judgment: [7] On November 1, 2012 Duprat, J. received the petitioner's Motion for Revocation and reappointed her as the curator to Mr. Brief's person and property , subject to the following conclusion: PREND ACTE de l'accord des parties:

a) que dans un délai de 30 jours les parties conviendront de la disposition des effets personnels et des meubles;

b) qu'au delà de ce délai de façon intérimaire, le curateur public agira comme curateur aux biens de J. B. ;

c) qu'au delà du délai de 30 jours, le Curateur public pourra agir dans les meilleurs intérêts de J. B. eu égard à ses biens incluant le droit pour le curateur public de procéder à la vente de la résidence du […] à Ville A. The merits of the motion to revoke are scheduled to be heard on August 14, 2013. [Emphasis added.] [ 2 ] The error alleged relates to the extent of the mandate conferred on the petitioner in the judgment of Duprat, J. The conclusions of the latter judgment, which was confirmed on appeal, speaks for itself, and nothing I may have written about it in my reasons affects its content.

Furthermore, the error alleged was irrelevant to the live issues before, and as I have mentioned, a correction of the error would not change the disposition of my judgment. [3] [ 3 ] Absent exceptional circumstances that are not present here, a motion to correct should only be pursued to correct the kind of error described in

article 475 C.C.P . that would have a bearing on the formal order. That is not the case with the application before me. [ 4 ] I therefore dismiss, without a hearing and without costs, the respondent's application. ALLAN R. HILTON, J.A. Mtre Jean El Masri EL MASRI AVOCAT INC.

For the appellant Mtre Geeta Narang NARANG & ASSOCIÉS For the respondent M... B... Mtre Alexandre Leroux PUBLIC CURATOR OF QUEBEC For the impleaded party Public Curator of Quebec