Small claims
In 2019, Pierre Avon and Michel Harvey each filed a small claims lawsuit against the City of Longueuil, after their cedar hedges were devoured by deer. The animals, having settled small claims in 2022, lacked food to meet their needs, particularly in Michel-Chartrand Park, where their overpopulation “threatens the ecological balance”. In doing so, many of them have fallen back on private cedar hedges, sometimes located hundreds of meters from the park, to feed. MM. Avon and Harvey thus alleged that “the City had failed in its obligations in its management of the overpopulation of deer.” The Small Claims Division of the Court of Quebec ruled in their favor.
“Predictable” situation
Small claims had estimated that the City had been aware of the problem of overpopulation on its territory “and the risks associated with it” for many years, but that it had been slow to act. In doing so, they concluded that the situation “experienced by Harvey and Avon in 2019 was predictable and that the City failed to act with prudence and diligence to control the overpopulation of deer.” The court consequently awarded them the damages claimed, namely sums of $5,000 and $15,000. Since the facts alleged in Longueuil in this case, the City has announced its intention to proceed with the slaughter of deer in the fall – up to 100 animals could be killed.
” Neglect “
The judicial saga has not stopped at small claims, even if the decisions there are usually “final”, as the Superior Court emphasizes. The City of Longueuil, arguing that there had been “absence or excess of jurisdiction on the part of the court”, filed an appeal for judicial review. Seals by The Press, MM. Both Avon and Harvey preferred not to comment on the recent decision, since the City has the option of appealing it. Mr. Harvey, whose property lost value due to damage to his cedars, he said, nevertheless deplored the fact that the municipality was prepared to spend considerable sums rather than recognize its responsibility. And he insists: “In small claims court, I did not attack the deer, I attacked the City’s negligence. »
Legal link questioned
Before the Superior Court, the City argued that no legal link united it to the deer, since they are “free and ownerless wild animals”. After analysis, the Superior Court, however, established that the legal status of the deer did not give rise to “immunity from liability” for the City. The latter also claimed that the Court could not impose an obligation on it with regard to animals only because they are found on land belonging to it – including Michel-Chartrand Park –, an “argument rejected”. In small claims, the plaintiffs argued that the City had on the contrary recognized its responsibility in a document given to citizens where one could read that “it is the City’s responsibility to manage the deer population on its territory.”
Argument rejected out of hand
Finally, the City attempted to argue that “its liability cannot be engaged, because there is no proof of gross or intentional misconduct, or bad faith”. This argument not having been argued in small claims, the Superior Court rejected it out of hand, affirming that “judicial review is not an analysis new of the contested decision”. The City of Longueuil has until May 18 to appeal the decision. Since this deadline has not yet expired, she preferred not to comment on the matter.