Newsletters

119

In psychological harassment cases, workers can now kill two birds with one stone

Citizens sometimes consider government structure reorganizations as cause for headaches. However, those may also have clearly positive impacts, as we can see from this example.

Prior to January 1, when an instance of psychological harassment caused an employment injury, a worker could be involved in two proceedings, with distinct objects, but where the same witnesses were testifying on the same facts:

  • one before the Commission des relations du travail (Labour Relations Board), to rule on the existence of psychological harassment under the Labour Standards Act;
  • another before the Commission des lésions professionnelles, to rule on the existence of an employment injury under the Act Respecting Industrial Accidents and Occupational Diseases.

On January 1, 2016, the Administrative Labour Tribunal was created, with four divisions, including one on labour relations and one on occupational health and safety. This will allow joining the two above proceedings, which will then be heard by a single member of the Tribunal. This will save time by eliminating the need to repeat testimonies from one hearing to the other. Therefore, a single hearing will decide whether there was psychological harassment and whether it caused an employment injury.

Commentary by Jacques Bélanger from our Labour and Employment Law Group.

119

Articles in the same category

No Notice of Default, No Termination

In Pavage Wemindji Inc. v. Compagnie de Construction et de Développement crie ltée, the Quebec Superior Court emphasized that a valid notice of default (mise en demeure) is not just a formality—it’s a precondition to exercising remedies like contract termination in many cases under Quebec civil law. The Decision The plaintiff, Pavage Wemindji Inc. (“Wemindji”), […]

Public Contracts: When Does a Penalty Clause Cross the Line?

Penalty clauses are a practical tool for owners: instead of having to prove actual losses when a contractor falls short, they can rely on a pre-agreed sum. For contractors, however, the stakes are equally significant — a lump-sum penalty can consume a substantial portion of the contract’s value. Still, the mechanism has its limits. Courts […]

Not So Intelligent!

Since the widespread adoption of artificial intelligence tools, growing concerns have emerged regarding their use in judicial proceedings. Recent decisions have relied on section 342 of the Code of Civil Procedure to sanction parties who make improper use of such tools. More specifically, this provision has been invoked on several occasions to address the use or citation […]

So? Is it settled or not?

In an interim decision in Djaferian v. Spanoudakis,rendered on February 20, 2026, the Superior Court had to determine whether an offer made 15 months earlier, prior to the institution of proceedings, could still be accepted and result in a transaction. Summary of Facts and Timeline The Plaintiff, a co-owner who sustained water damage to his private […]

Office Parties and the Employer’s Duty to Prevent Harassment

In De Sousa and Corporation interactive Eidos, 2026 QCTAT 4, the Quebec Administrative Labour Tribunal (ALT) appears to have broadened the scope of an employer’s obligation to prevent harassment. The decision arose from a complaint filed by a former employee who had been sexually assaulted at her home by a colleague following an office party organized by the […]

Should Economic Losses Be Considered Property Damage?

The Quebec Court of Appeal in Zurich, Compagnie d’assurances SA c. CRT Construction inc., recently overturned the Superior Court’s decision on the interpretation of a construction insurance policy. Facts CRT Construction Inc. (“CRT”) was retained by the City of Montreal (“City”) to perform major construction work at the Atwater water treatment plant. At the City’s request, CRT […]