2022 QCCA 1568, 2022 QCCA 1568

Droit de la famille — 221979 2022 QCCA 1568 COURT OF APPEAL CANADA PROVINCE OF QUEBEC REGISTRY OF MONTREAL No.: 500-09-030265-227 ( 500-12-339456-182 ) MINUTES OF HEARING WARNING : Disclosure and circulation prohibited: The Code of Civil Procedure (“ C.C.P .”) provides that, except as authorized by the court, no person shall disclose or circulate any information that would allow a party or a child whose interests are at stake in a proceeding in a family matter to be identified (arts. 15 and 16 C.C.P .). DATE: November 17, 2022 THE HONOURABLE FRÉDÉRIC BACHAND, J.A. APPLICANT COUNSEL K. Z. Mtre PATRYCJA NOWAKOWSKA ( Bergman & Associé

s) By videoconference RESPONDENT COUNSEL P. S. PRESENT AND Unrepresented IMPLEADED PARTY COUNSEL Director of youth protection Mtre Heidi Lechter ( CIUSSS

A) DESCRIPTION: De bene esse application for leave to appeal from part of a judgment of the Quebec Superior Court (Art. 30 paras 2 and 3, 31 para. 2 and 357 C.C.P. ) . Clerk at the hearing : Mélanie Camiré Courtroom: RC-18 HEARING

Continuation of the hearing. Identification of counsel. Mélanie Camiré, Clerk at the hearing JUDGMENT WARNING : Disclosure and circulation prohibited: The Code of Civil Procedure (“ C.C.P .”) provides that, except as authorized by the court, no person shall disclose or circulate any information that would allow a party or a child whose interests are at stake in a proceeding in a family matter to be identified (arts. 15 and 16 C.C.P .). [ 1 ] In my view, the applicant does not need leave to appeal any aspect of the Superior Court judgment at issue here.

That judgment terminates a divorce proceeding; it was not rendered in the course of such a proceeding. Moreover, while it does declare that several applications previously made by the applicant constitute abuses of procedure, it does not “dismi[s] a judicial application because of its abusive nature/ rejett[e] une demande en justice en raison de son caractère abusive ” within the meaning of

article 30 para. 2(3) C.C.P. [ 2 ] The Director of Youth Protection (“DYP”) argues that, in some respects, the applicant’s appeal amounts to a challenge to an earlier Superior Court judgment that has acquired the authority of res judicata and that confirmed the Court of Québec, Youth Division’s exclusive jurisdiction over the issue of parental time. That may be so, but even if the DYP was correct, this would not bear on the main issue before me, which is whether leave is required to appeal any aspect of the Superior Court’s October 11, 2022, judgment.

FOR THESE REASONS, THE UNDERSIGNED: [ 3 ] DISMISSES as unnecessary the de bene esse application for leave to appeal, without legal costs. FRÉDÉRIC BACHAND, J.A.