2019 QCCA 1235, 2019 QCCA 1235

Charles c. Boiron Canada inc. 2019 QCCA 1235 COURT OF APPEAL CANADA PROVINCE OF QUEBEC REGISTRY OF MONTREAL No: 500-09-027522-184, 500-09-027865-187, 500-09-027866-185 (500-06-000609-129) MINUTES OF THE HEARING DATE: June 21, 2019 CORAM: THE HONOURABLE MARK SCHRAGER , J.A. STÉPHANE SANSFAçon , J.A. MICHEL BEAUPRÉ , J.A. N o : 500-09-027522-184, 500-09-027865-187, 500-09-027866-185 APPELLANT COUNSEL ADANNA CHARLES Mtre JEFFREY ORENSTEIN Mtre ANDREA GRASS (Consumer law group inc.) RESPONDENT COUNSEL BOIRON CANADA INC. Mtre MARIE-LOUISE DELISLE Mtre MARIE-PIER CLOUTIER (Woods s.e.n.c.r.l.)

500-09-027522-184: On appeal from a judgment rendered on April 3, 2018 by the Honourable Justice Suzanne Courchesne of the Superior Court, District of Montreal 500-09-027865-187, 500-09-027866-185: On appeal from two judgments rendered on September 6, 2018 by the Honourable Justice Suzanne Courchesne of the Superior Court, District of Montreal NATURE OF THE APPEALS : Interlocutory Judgments – Class Action Application to amend the Application to institute proceedings dismissed.

Defendant’s application to radiate allegations granted in part – Application to produce additional expertise reports dismissed. 500-09-027865-187, 500-09-027866-185: Application for permission to present indispensable new evidence. Clerk: Philippe Charette Courtroom: Antonio-Lamer HEARING 9:31 Commencement of the hearing. Identification of counsel.

Introductory remarks by the Court. 9:32 Submissions by Mtre Orenstein regarding the appellant’s Application for permission to present indispensable new evidence . 9:37 On the appellant’s Application for permission to present indispensable new evidence : BY THE COURT: judgment – see page 4. 9:38 Submissions by Mtre Orenstein regarding the other aspects of the appeal. 10:52 Mtre Delisle submits a plan of argumentation to the Court. 10:53 Recess. 11:15 Resumption of the hearing. 11:15 Submissions by Mtre Delisle.

12:20 Reply by Mtre Orenstein. 12:25 Mtre Orenstein will provide the Court with a letter explaining the mention “R-15” in the appellant’s factum by Tuesday, June 25 th 2019. 12:29 BY THE COURT: The file is taken under advisement. Conclusion of the hearing. Philippe Charette Clerk BY THE COURT JUDGMENT [ 1 ] By application dated June 13, 2019, the Appellant seeks leave to present indispensable new evidence to this Court in support of the appeal. The motion refers to evidence that apparently became available through newspaper articles published on May 15 and May 17, 2019.

No explanation for the one month delay is given in the text of the motion which is supported by the affidavit of an attorney and not the Appellant. [ 2 ] In any event, the media articles in question report on a supposed policy or recommendation concerning homeopathy adopted by the Association des bannières et chaînes de pharmacies du Québec (ABCPQ) and/or certain pharmacists in Quebec so that certain of the latter have affixed signage on shelving displaying homeopathic products, which signage reads as follows: “Chers clients, L’efficacité des produits homéopathiques n’est généralement pas soutenue par des données scientifiques probantes.

Consultez votre pharmacien pour en discuter.” [ 3 ] The newspaper articles are not relevant to the appeal pending before this Court which concerns the adjudication of two issues by the judge: (

i) striking certain allegations of the proceedings; and (ii) permitting the filing of additional experts reports. At most, the new evidence might indicate that some Quebec pharmacists tend to agree with the basic premise of the Appellant’s case on the merits. The articles are not however relevant to this Court’s assessment of the judgment a quo . Consequently, the proposed evidence is not indispensable. FOR THE FOREGOING REASONS, THE COURT: [ 4 ] DISMISSES the Appellant’s Application for permission to present indispensable new evidence dated June 13, 2019, with legal costs. MARK SCHRAGER, J.A. STÉPHANE SANSFAÇON, J.A. MICHEL BEAUPRÉ, J.A.