Court File No. 35009 in the SUPREME COURT of CANADA
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Court File No. 35009 IN THE SUPREME COURT OF CANADA (ON APPEAL FROM THE QUEBEC COURT OF APPEAL) B E T W E E N: BANQUE DE MONTRÉAL, CITIBANQUE CANADA, LA BANQUE TORONTO-DOMINION, BANQUE NATIONALE DU CANADA Appellants (Appellants) - and - RÉAL MARCOTTE, BERNARD LAPARÉ, ATTORNEY GENERAL OF QUÉBEC, LE PRESIDENT DE L’OFFICE DE LA PROTECTION DU CONSOMMATEUR Respondents (Respondents, Mise-en-Cause) - and - ATTORNEY GENERAL OF ONTARIO, ATTORNEY GENERAL OF BRITISH COLUMBIA, ATTORNEY GENERAL OF ALBERTA Interveners (Interveners) FACTUM OF THE INTERVENER, THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF ONTARIO ATTORNEY GENERAL OF ONTARIO BURKE-ROBERTSON Constitutional Law Branch Barristers & Solicitors 4th Floor, 720 Bay Street 200-441 MacLaren Street Toronto, ON M7A 2S9 Ottawa, ON K2P 2H3 Janet E. Minor (LSUC No. 14898A) Robert E. Houston, Q.C. Tel: (416) 326-4137 Tel.: (613) 236-9665 Fax: (416) 326-4015 Fax: (613) 235-4430 [email protected] E-mail: [email protected] Robert A. Donato (LSUC No. 44544F) Tel: (416) 326-4473 Fax: (416) 326-4015 [email protected] Counsel for the Intervener Ottawa Agent for the Intervener Attorney General of Ontario Attorney General of Ontario TO: THE REGISTRAR Supreme Court of Canada 301 Wellington Street Ottawa, Ontario K1A 0J1 AND TO: Mahmud Jamal Patricia J. Wilson Sylvain Deslauriers Osler, Hoskin & Harcourt LLP Sylvana Conte 340 Albert Street, Suite 1900 Alberto Martinez Ottawa, Ontario Osler, Hoskin & Harcourt LLP K1R 7Y6 Box 50, 1 First Canadian Place Toronto, Ontario M5X 1B8 Tel: (416) 862-6764 Tel: (613) 787-1009 Fax: (416) 862-6666 Fax: (613) 235-2867 Email : [email protected] Email: [email protected] Counsel for the Appellants/Respondents, Agent for the Appellants/Respondents, Bank of Montreal, Citibank, Toronto- Bank of Montreal, Citibank, Toronto- Dominion Bank, National Bank of Canada, Dominion Bank, National Bank of Amex Bank of Canada, Royal Bank of Canada, Amex Bank of Canada, Royal Canada, Canadian Imperial Bank of Bank of Canada, Canadian Imperial Commerce, Bank of Nova Scotia, Bank of Commerce, Bank of Nova Scotia, Laurentian Bank Laurentian Bank Bruce W. Johnston Moira Dillon Phillippe H. Trudel Supreme Law Group André Lespérance 900 – 275 Slater Street Andrew Cleland Ottawa, Ontario Trudel & Johnston K1P 5H9 Bureau 90 750, Côte de la Place d`Armes Montreal, Quebec H2Y 2X8 Tel: (514) 871-8385 Tel: (613) 691-1224 Fax: (514) 871-8800 Fax: (613) 691-1338 Email: [email protected] Email: [email protected] Counsel for the Appellants/Respondents, Agent for the Appellants/Respondents, Réal Marcotte and Bernard Laparé Réal Marcotte and Bernard Laparé Jean-François Jobin Pierre Landry Francis Demers Noël & Associés Samuel Chayer 111, rue Champlain Bernard, Roy & Associés Gatineau, Quebec 8.00 – 1 rue Notre-Dame Est J8X 3R1 Montréal, Quebec H2Y 1B6 Tel: (514) 393-2336 Ext: 51452 Tel: (819) 771-7393 Fax: (514) 873-7074 Fax: (819) 771-5397 Email: [email protected] Email : [email protected] Counsel for the Respondent/Intervener, Agent for the Respondent/Intervener, Attorney General of Quebec Attorney General of Quebec Marc Migneault Pierre Landry Allard, Renaud et Associés Noël & Associés 100, rue Laviolette, Bureau RC 11 111, rue Champlain Trois-Rivières, Quebec Gatineau, Quebec G9A 5S9 J8X 3R1 Tel: (888) 672-2556 Ext. 3426 Tel: (819) 771-7393 Fax: (819) 371-6489 Fax: (819) 771-5397 Email : [email protected] Counsel for the Respondent/Intervener, Agent for the Respondent/Intervener, Président de l`Office de la Protection du Président de l`Office de la Protection du Consommateur Consommateur Nancy E. Brown Robert E. Houston, Q.C. Attorney General of British Columbia Burke-Robertson 1001 Douglas Street 441 MacLaren Street P.O. Box 9280 Stn Prov Govt Suite 200 Victoria, British Columbia Ottawa, Ontario V8W 9J7 K2P 2H3 Tel: (250) 356-5597 Tel: (613) 236-9665 Fax: (250) 356-9154 Fax: (613) 235-4430 Email: [email protected] Email: [email protected] Counsel for the Intervener, Attorney Agent for the Intervener, Attorney General of British Columbia General of British Columbia Robert J. Normey Henry S. Brown, Q.C. Attorney General of Alberta Gowling Lafleur Henderson LLP 4th Floor, Bowker Building 2600 – 160 Elgin St 9833 – 109th Street P.O. Box 466, Stn “D” Edmonton, Alberta Ottawa, Ontario T5K 2E8 K1P 1C3 Tel: (780) 422-9532 Tel: (613) 233-1781 Fax: (780) 425-0307 Fax: (613) 788-3433 Email: [email protected] Email: [email protected] Counsel for the Intervener, Attorney Agent for the Intervener, Attorney General of Alberta General of Alberta John B. Laskin Patricia J. Wilson Torys LLP Osler, Hoskin & Harcourt LLP 3000 Maritime Life Tower, TD Centre 340 Albert Street 79 Wellington Street West Suite 1900 Toronto, Ontario Ottawa, Ontario M5K 1N2 K1R 7Y6 Tel: (416) 865-7317 Tel: (613) 787-1009 Fax: (416) 865-7380 Fax: (613) 235-2867 Email: [email protected] Email: [email protected] Counsel for the Intervener, Canadian Agent for the Intervener, Canadian Bankers Association Bankers Association TABLE OF CONTENTS PART I – OVERVIEW AND STATEMENT OF FACTS .................................................... 1 PART II – QUESTIONS IN ISSUE ...................................................................................... 2 PART III – ARGUMENT ...................................................................................................... 2 1. The Interjurisdictional Immunity Doctrine ............................................................ 2 2. The Interjurisdictional Immunity Doctrine is Not Applicable in this Case ........... 6 A. The “Pith and Substance” of the Consumer Protection Act Provisions .......... 6 B. The Provincial Law Does Not Trench on the “Core” of the Federal Banking Power ......................................................................... 8 C. The Provincial Law Does Not “Impair” the Core ............................................14 3. The Preamble to the Bank Act Alone Cannot Trigger the Paramountcy Doctrine 19 PART IV – COSTS ................................................................................................................20 PART V – ORDER SOUGHT ...............................................................................................20 PART VI – TABLE OF AUTHORITIES ..............................................................................22 PART VII – LEGISLATION.................................................................................................26 i 1 PART I – OVERVIEW AND STATEMENT OF FACTS Overview 1. This case concerns the interplay between the provincial power over “Property and Civil Rights in the Province” (s. 92(13) of the Constitution Act, 1867) and the federal power over “Banking” (s. 91(15)). The Attorney General of Ontario intervenes to address the first constitutional question in this proceeding: whether specific provisions of the Quebec Consumer Protection Act regulating credit card transactions and agreements are constitutionally inapplicable to banks. Constitution Act, 1867 (U.K.), 30 & 31 Vict., c. 3, ss. 92(13), 91(15), reprinted in R.S.C. 1985, App. III, No. 5 [Constitution Act, 1867]. Consumer Protection Act, R.S.Q., c. P-40.1. 2. The Attorney General of Ontario respectfully submits that the Quebec Consumer Protection Act provisions are applicable to the appellant banks. It is submitted that neither step of the two-prong interjurisdictional immunity test is satisfied in this case: (1) the provincial law does not trench on the “core” of the federal banking power; and (2) the provincial law does not “impair” the core. The Superior Court of Quebec was correct in holding that neither step of the test was satisfied, and the Quebec Court of Appeal correctly affirmed that holding. 3. Ontario makes no submissions on whether the specifics of Quebec’s Consumer Protection Act conflict with particular provisions of the federal Bank Act, so as to trigger the paramountcy doctrine. Ontario’s position is that if this Court should hold that specific provisions of the legislation do conflict, then any such conflict should be resolved by the doctrine of paramountcy. As this Court has affirmed in its federalism jurisprudence, paramountcy is the preferable, more flexible constitutional doctrine in cases of overlapping federal and provincial legislation. Canadian Western Bank v. Alberta, [2007] 2 S.C.R. 3 [Book of Authorities of the Attorney General of Ontario [BOA] Tab 11] at para. 77 [Canadian Western Bank]. Law Society of British Columbia v. Mangat, [2001] 3 S.C.R. 113 [BOA Tab 17] at paras. 52, 54 [Mangat]. 2 Statement of Facts 4. The Attorney General of Ontario accepts the facts as stated by the respondent mise-en- cause, the Attorney General of Quebec, and as found by the trial judge. Factum of Respondent Attorney General of Quebec at paras. 4-17. Marcotte c. Banque de Montréal, 2009 QCCS 2764 at paras. 215-318 [Superior Court Judgment]. PART II – QUESTIONS IN ISSUE 5. The following constitutional questions were stated by the Chief Justice of Canada on June 24, 2013: 1. Are ss. 12, 66-72, 83, 91, 92, 126, 127, 219, 228, and 271-272 of the Consumer Protection Act, R.S.Q., c. P-40.1, and ss. 55-61 of the Regulation respecting the application of the Consumer Protection Act, R.R.Q., c. P-40.1, r. 3, constitutionally inapplicable in respect of bank-issued credit cards by reason of the doctrine of interjurisdictional immunity? 2. Are ss. 12, 66-72, 83, 91, 92, 126, 127, 219, 228, and 271-272 of the Consumer Protection Act, R.S.Q., c. P-40.1, and ss.