Abuse in the QMJHL | The request for authorized collective action

The request for class action targeting the Canadian Hockey League, the Quebec Maritime Junior Hockey League (QMJHL) as well as the 18 teams that make it up was authorized, Wednesday, by Judge Jacques G. Bouchard of the Superior Court of Quebec.

The request targets “all hockey players who suffered abuse while they were minors and playing in the Quebec Major Junior Hockey League, since 1^er July 1969,” we can read in the legal proceedings.

The main applicant for this request, filed by the Kugler Kandestin firm, is the former player of the Saguenéens de Chicoutimi and the Voltigeurs de Drummondville, Carl Latulippe. A first-round pick in the 1994 draft, Mr. Latulippe says, among other things, that he was the victim of several abuses from certain veterans among the Saguenéens, including violence, intimidation and attacks. The Press told his story a year ago.

The right procedural vehicle

Last month, the QMJHL, through its lawyer Christian Trépanier, argued that the request for authorization of collective action should be rejected, because it was not the right procedural vehicle to hear this case. M^e Trépanier had stressed that “out of 18 of the teams targeted in the appeal, 13 did not exist at the time of the facts”. For him, “joining everyone in the same claim and demanding their joint liability without regard to their concrete actions” was an “indefensible thesis”.

Representing Mr. Latulippe, lawyer David Stolow argued that the Canadian Hockey League (CHL), the QMJHL and its teams had demonstrated “systemic negligence” by tolerating “a culture of abuse and silence » and that class action was the right vehicle to hear this case.

In his judgment published Wednesday, Judge Jacques G. Bouchard explains that the procedure for authorizing a collective action “does not constitute a pre-investigation on the merits”. It is rather a “filtering process” where a judge must simply ensure “to rule out requests that are frivolous or manifestly ill-founded”, which is not the case here, he says. he.

In his decision, the judge recognizes that the request for authorization of collective action “is formulated in a broad and ambitious manner”. “But it is only upon examination on the merits of all the allegations of facts that it will be possible to detect or not the existence of such joint and several liability with regard to all or only certain teams” . The judge indicates that the burden of proof which will make it possible to determine “the alleged negligence of each of the defendants who would have even established it as a system” will pose “a serious challenge” to the plaintiffs.

The magistrate notes that the fact that a similar procedure is taking place in Ontario should not “prevent the court [québécois] to exercise its competence. He therefore grants Mr. Latulippe the status of representative and authorizes the request for collective action. Mr. Latulippe is seeking $650,000 from the defendants and $15,000,000 in collective punitive and exemplary damages.

In the court document, it is mentioned that the term “abuse” refers to “any form of physical, sexual and/or psychological assault, in particular the fact of having been confined, shaved, stripped, drugged and/or intoxicated by force, forced or encouraged to physically and/or sexually assault others, forced to drink or eat urine, saliva, semen, feces and/or other vile substances, forced to self-injure , or forced to commit acts of bestiality.”

M^e Stolow affirms that Mr. Latulippe “very well received” this judgment which gives him, as well as several potential other players, “the opportunity to seek justice for the abuses they suffered”. When the official notice of judgment is sent to the parties in the coming days, the QMJHL and the other defendants will have 30 days to request permission to appeal.