When they manage contractual relations
By Denis Carmel
MONTREAL – Last Thursday, March 24, the Supreme Court of Canada determined it would not hear the case of the Government of Québec ordering Internet service providers (ISPs) to block some gambling sites, therefore confirming a Court of Appeal of Québec (CAQ) ruling, that in this case, telecommunications falls within federal jurisdiction, as it interfered with the ISPs’ operations.
By coincidence, the same day the same CAQ confirmed, in part, a ruling from the Superior Court stating that articles of the Québec Consumer Protection Act (CPA) could be used to govern contractual relations between customers and phone companies.
Investigation
The issue started when investigators from the Office de la protection du consommateur (OPC) filed charges against Telus for 364 infractions and Bell for two in February 2015, for various violations of the CPA.
Court of Québec
Telus and Bell claimed the OPC did not have jurisdiction since telecommunications is an exclusively federal jurisdiction.
A judge from the Court of Québec ruled they were right in April 2019.
Superior Court
The Attorney General of Québec appealed to the Superior Court, which ruled, in June 2020 that the sections of the CPA in question were constitutional.
The Court went further, declaring that, since the infractions were made prior to the adoption of CRTC’s Wireless Code, they were not in conflict with CRTC’S rules but that after the adoption of the code, there were differences from the CPA and the code had preponderance.
Court of Appeal of Québec
So, last Thursday the CAQ confirmed the Superior Court’s ruling except for the aspect of the preponderance of the CRTC’s code since it was not what the court had to review and it had no record to make that decision.
To recap – the Court of Québec ruled the CPA did not apply; the Superior Court said it did; the Court of Appeal confirmed, in part, the Superior Court ruling.
This probably needs a little clarification, and we can assume that the Supreme Court will be asked to look at this (within sixty days) and it might be tempted to grant leave.
In parting, we are tempted to underline that the CRTC is not the only legal process that is slow…
