An experienced judge of the Administrative Labor Tribunal (TAT) who, as a worker, contests a decision of his own tribunal invoked in practice his “ignorance of the law” to justify his delay in filing a request. However, the version given by Simon Lemire is “not probable”, decided his colleague from the TAT.
Posted at 5:00 a.m.
“The situation put forward by the worker regarding his “impossibility” to file a request for review before June 2022 demonstrates his lack of vigilance. It also corresponds to invoking, to a certain extent, his ignorance of the law, which cannot constitute a reasonable ground, ”concluded the administrative judge Ann Quigley, on September 14.
Administrative judge at the TAT, Simon Lemire has been a decision-maker for more than 30 years in matters of work accidents and occupational diseases. A plumber from 1967 to 1990, he developed deafness of occupational origin, recognized in 2012. It was therefore as a worker that he filed appeals before the TAT in 2021 to claim his right to technical aids for his deafness.
Internal resources
However, Simon Lemire seems to have confused his role as a judge with his personal life, since he began to use “many times” the internal resources of the TAT for his appeal. He even took the liberty of writing to the president of the TAT in an e-mail where he familiarizes himself with and taunts his colleague assigned to his file.
“A well-informed person would easily conclude that they have taken advantage of their position as an administrative judge,” concluded administrative judge Jean M. Poirier on April 7. But refusing to “play in this bad movie”, Judge Poirier finally recused himself. The judge, however, stressed that the request for recusal made by Simon Lemire was a “form of intimidation”.
Two months later, Simon Lemire filed a motion for review or revocation against the decision, which he describes as “illegal”, in which Judge Poirier explains the reasons for his recusal. The worker asks that the reasons for the decision be set aside, since Judge Poirier caused him to suffer significant prejudice by motivating his decision with “erroneous” elements.
Simon Lemire argues that his colleague should only have informed the parties of his intention to recuse himself, “no more”.
However, the “reasonable” time limit to file such a request is 30 days, recalls administrative judge Ann Quigley.
To justify his failure to file his motion within a reasonable time, Simon Lemire suggested that the director of legal services of the Tribunal – to whom he had asked “advice” – had given him bad information in April 2022. But the director gave him had only provided general information, before recommending that he consult a lawyer in order to avoid a possible “conflict of interest”.
Based on this advice, Simon Lemire maintains that he did not file a request. He claims to have changed his mind only after receiving an email from the President of the TAT sent to all judges to clarify the rules on recusal. A version that is not “likely”, according to Judge Quigley.
“The Tribunal can only assume that the worker, by virtue of his legal training and his extensive experience as an administrative judge within the Tribunal responsible for deciding this appeal, was or should have been aware of his rights and of the manner to exercise them”, concluded Judge Quigley, thus declaring the worker’s request inadmissible.