Newsletters

207

Companies May Hold Remote Meetings, Despite Governing Documents

By press release dated April 27, 2020, the Minister of Justice and Attorney General of Québec announced that for the duration of the COVID-19 public health emergency, legal persons who must hold meetings of their boards of directors, shareholders (in the case of a corporation) and members (in the case of non-profit organizations) can do so remotely, even if their governing documents require in-person attendance or actually prohibit participation in meetings by technological means. This includes corporations, non-profit legal persons governed by Part III of the Companies Act (Quebec), cooperatives (for both annual and special meetings), partnerships, syndicates of co-owners, professional orders, the council of commissioners of a school board and the governing board of an elementary or high school.

Generally speaking, such technological means must include the use of equipment by the participants which enable all of them to hear each other (e.g., conference call or video-conference) and must permit voting and the recording of the results. Where a secret vote is required, it can be held by any agreed-upon method of communication, failing which it can be held by any method which permits the collection of ballots for subsequent verification and which preserves the secrecy of the votes.

Similar measures have been adopted across Canada in the various provinces and territories. This is however only a temporary solution, and all organizations of every nature who are required to hold meetings should seize this opportunity to update their governing documents (constitution, by-laws, agreement, etc.) to specifically permit meetings held by technological means and to set out the requirements for the meeting to be held and for those “in attendance” to participate.

207

Authors

Sharon G. Druker, Ad. E.

Lawyer, Partner and Head of the Corporate Services Department

Articles in the same category

Ruin Finds a Reason

In Société d’assurance Beneva Inc. c. Ville de Sherbrooke, 2026 QCCA 1301, the Court of Appeal delivers a decision as concise as it is compelling on liability arising from the ruin of an immovable, in a case involving the rupture of a water main. Its impact could extend well beyond underground pipe failures. The Facts […]

There Is No Point in Submitting a Bid Without Conducting Your Research First

In 9329-0146 Québec Inc. (M. Potvin Excavation) v. City of Saint-Constant, 2026 QCCA 1199, the Quebec Court of Appeal reaffirmed the principles governing a contracting authority’s duty to provide information and a bidder’s corresponding duty to seek clarification where necessary. The Facts  In May 2020, the City of Saint-Constant issued a public call for bids […]

2026 World Cup: FIFA Can Commercialise the Tournament, But Not Trust

Introduction With 48 teams, 104 matches, three host countries and 39 days of competition, the 2026 World Cup was already destined to make history because of its sheer scale. On the field, with a transformed VAR system (Video Assistant Referee) and FIFA’s new regulations, every player action was subjected to microscopic scrutiny. Off the field, […]

An Insurer Is Not Required to Uncover What the Insured Was Required to Disclose

In Kayembe-Kabeya v. Industrielle Alliance, assurance et services financiers inc., 2026 QCCS 1714, the Superior Court sets the record straight on the principle of contractual “utmost good faith”. The Facts In September 2019, Ms. Ricady Mede (hereinafter “Mede”) purchased a life insurance policy from Industrielle Alliance (hereinafter the “Insurer”). A few months later, she died of […]

When it’s too late for latent defects…

The Superior Court recently rendered a judgment in Reinert v. Construction Maurice Bilodeau Inc., 2026 QCCS 2276, dealing with timeliness to give notice in cases of latent defects. The Facts In 2013, Ms. Sylvie Reinert and Mr. Denis Leclerc retained Construction Maurice Bilodeau Inc. (“CMB”) for the construction of a residential building on a vacant lot in Lévis. […]

Insurance Math: One Claim, Two Fires, Three Points of Origin, Zero Recovery: When Circumstantial Evidence Speaks Louder Than a Confession

In Chatel v. Desjardins Insurance, 2026 QCCS 712, the Quebec Superior Court reaffirmed a principle of insurance law: direct evidence is not required to establish an intentional fault. Mr. Chatel claimed $532,000 under his homeowner’s insurance policy following two fires that occurred four days apart. The first caused partial damage to his residence, while the second […]