Supreme Court will not consider the COVID-19 penalty challenge from Quebecers
On appeal, Justices Martin Vauclair, Benoît Moore, and Éric Hardy noted that while the plaintiffs had experienced inconveniences due to health measures, their request lacked relevance since the decrees in question no longer applied.
People ticketed for violating health measures imposed by the François Legault government during the COVID-19 pandemic will not receive refunds for their fines. This decision came after a group of five individuals, including Lily Monier, Stéphane Blais, Richard Girgis, Denis Larrivée, and Sonia Grewal, ended their legal battle before the Supreme Court. The court declined to hear their appeal, effectively upholding a unanimous ruling by the Quebec Court of Appeal made on January 24.
Background of the Case
The appellants had unsuccessfully pursued legal action at multiple levels to have their fines canceled and reimbursed. They argued that COVID-19 did not pose a serious threat to public health in Quebec and claimed that the state of health emergency, which lasted until June 1, 2022, was maintained for “political and opportunistic reasons.” Their claims included allegations that curfews, restrictions on gatherings, the health passport mandate, and mask-wearing policies infringed upon their rights, rendering these measures unconstitutional.
Court Rulings
In June 2023, Superior Court Justice Michel Pinsonnault ruled that the lifting of the state of health emergency made their judicial review moot. Although he acknowledged the significant impact of COVID-19 during the pandemic—reporting over 50,000 infections, 6,000 hospitalizations, and more than 5,000 deaths—he noted that the plaintiffs' request for refunds illustrated a “reckless” and “abusive” appeal, aimed at overturning previous legal judgments made since March 2020.
On appeal, Justices Martin Vauclair, Benoît Moore, and Éric Hardy noted that while the plaintiffs had experienced inconveniences due to health measures, their request lacked relevance since the decrees in question no longer applied.
They pointed out that individual claims for damages or violations of rights should be pursued separately, and the court invited the offenders to present their cases individually if they believed they had suffered harm.
In summary, the court has reinforced that individuals seeking redress for fines incurred during the pandemic must navigate the legal system on a case-by-case basis rather than through a collective appeal against measures that have since been lifted.
