A broad by-law that de facto prohibited the use of firearms on the territory of the City of Mascouche was invalidated by the Superior Court following the victory of a landowner who was fined for having hunted on his land nearly ten years ago.
The judgment, delivered last Friday, thus puts an end to a long legal saga that began on November 10, 2013.
That day, Jean-Guy Ouellette was caught red-handed by the police while he, along with his son, gutted a freshly killed deer on one of the lands he owned in this municipality of the north crown.
However, the entrepreneur has all the necessary permits to hunt and has taken all the courses required by the Government of Quebec in order to possess firearms. His are also registered in good and due form.
But the City’s by-law 1153 is clear: “it is forbidden to use a weapon within a perimeter of one kilometer of any public place, building, private land, electrical transformer station, power line, railroad and any town bordering the City”.
The man therefore challenges his fine; the beginning of a long procedure before the courts begins.
Enhance security
Adopted three years earlier, in 2010, by-law 1153 was intended to respond to complaints from users of hiking and equestrian trails frightened by gunshots, including one fired not far from a soccer field, during the season of the hunting, explained in court the director of the Mascouche police department at the time, Francis Caron.
Before the Superior Court, the City of Mascouche will later plead that it is a question of “enhancing public security on its territory” by controlling the places where hunting is permitted.
But now, the by-law in question has the effect of prohibiting the use of weapons on the territory of Mascouche, as demonstrated by the report of a land surveyor filed in evidence, even if one of its articles provided for exceptions for private and zoned agricultural land over 40,000 m2.
An “absolute prohibition”
In the eyes of Jean-Guy Ouellette and his lawyers, this ban therefore constituted an “absolute prohibition” and therefore aims to “totally prohibit hunting on the territory of Mascouche”.
A vision shared by Judge Charles Bienvenu of the Superior Court who, in his exhaustive 72-page judgment, agreed with the landowner.
While recognizing the right of municipalities to legislate to control the use of weapons on their territory, the magistrate judges that Mascouche has used its powers unreasonably. “A municipal by-law may have an impact on the activity of hunting, but cannot be abusive or constitute a devious end to prohibit it completely, unless there is compelling justification,” he wrote in his judgment.
The Mascouche by-law also contradicted numerous provincial and federal laws which should have taken precedence since they came under the jurisdiction of these levels of government.
“Mascouche is not Montreal”
The City of Mascouche will have no other choice but to go back to the drawing board to modify its by-law 1153, estimates the main lawyer at Municonseil, Mario Paul-Hus, who has forty years of experience in law. municipal.
“If the distance […] had been more reasonable, or if the sectors where this distance applied had been limited, the judge could have come to the conclusion that [le règlement] was valid,” he explains.
Contrary to the case of Mascouche, Me Paul-Hus does not believe that the municipal regulations of Montreal, where any shot within the limits of the City of Montreal, in nature parks and within 500 meters of a residence is prohibited, is at risk. Indeed, the metropolis could easily demonstrate the need for such regulations, he believes.
Mascouche and Montreal are not the same thing! Before a judge says that the by-law prohibiting firing a firearm in Montreal, with all the problems we know, [n’est pas valide]it will be very difficult to convince.
Mario Paul-Hus, lawyer
Reached on Tuesday, the City of Mascouche indicated that it did not wish to comment immediately on the fallout from this Superior Court decision, which it has not yet been able to analyze in its entirety. The municipality has 30 days to appeal.
For her part, Jean-Guy Ouellette’s lawyer, Ms.e Isabelle Landry, said she was satisfied with the decision rendered by Judge Charles Bienvenu, while specifying not to speak on behalf of her client who has not yet had the opportunity to read the judgment.
“Certainly, if this judgment is not appealed […]we assume that the other municipalities will take good note of it and adapt their regulations according to this decision, she believes.
The Union of Municipalities of Quebec (UMQ) indicated that it would follow how this cause evolves. The decision “could indeed have repercussions on other municipal by-laws on the control of hunting and more broadly on the autonomy and the powers of the municipalities in the matter”, explains its spokesperson, Patrick Lemieux.