Newsletters

147

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.

147

Authors

Sharon G. Druker, Ad. E.

Lawyer, Partner and Head of the Corporate Services Department

Articles in the same category

When Love and Construction Contracts Go Out the Window…

In Gélinas v. LG Constructions TR inc., rendered on October 30, 2025, the Court of Appeal comments on the legal framework governing a contractor unilaterally terminating two construction contracts. In particular, the Court clarifies the application of article 2129 of the Civil Code of Quebec (“C.C.Q.”), which provides, when applicable, that a client is bound […]

Finally Properly Interpreted, the Policy Had a Heart

In a recent decision, Morissette v. BMO Société d’assurance vie, the Superior Court reviewed the principles applicable to the interpretation of insurance policies. Facts In June 2003, the Plaintiff took out a health insurance policy (hereinafter “Policy”) with BMO Société d’assurance vie (hereinafter “BMO”). The Policy provides, among other things, that $150,000 will be paid […]

When the Remedy Becomes the Dispute: Medical Liability Under Scrutiny

In the case N.L. v. Mathieu, 2025 QCCS 517, the Superior Court dismissed a medical liability lawsuit filed by a teacher against her former family doctor, in which she sought over $1.9 million in damages. The plaintiff accused her doctor of having inappropriately prescribed medication over several years, without proper follow-up and without informing her […]

Bill 89 and the Future of Labour Disputes in Quebec

Passed by the National Assembly on May 29, 2025, Bill 89 (An Act to give greater consideration to the needs of the population in the event of a strike or a lock-out, hereinafter the “Bill”) will come into force on November 30, 2025. The Bill, which has faced strong opposition from unions, will bring significant […]

Latent Defects: Notice Must Be Given, but to Whom, When and How? The Court of Appeal Answers

On this past September 26, in the context of a claim for latent defects, in the matter of Meyer v. Pichette (Estate of Morin), 2025 QCCA 1193, the Court of appeal confirmed a Superior Court judgment which dismissed proceedings in warranty brought against former vendors as sufficient notice of the defects was not provided prior […]

You Should Not Believe Everything you Read on Social Media…

In a recent decision, Boucal v. Rancourt-Maltais, the Superior Court reviewed the principles applicable to defamation cases. Facts The Defendant is a member of a private Facebook group called “Féministes Bas-St-Laurent”. In this group, Ms. Khadidiatou Yewwi allegedly posted testimony about the Plaintiff. Stating that she was troubled by the testimony and had herself heard […]