Newsletters

192

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.

192

Authors

Sharon G. Druker, Ad. E.

Lawyer, Partner and Head of the Corporate Services Department

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 […]