The City of Quebec will be able to continue its preparatory work to build the tramway, judge Clément Samson of the superior court ruled.
• Read also: Tramway: fewer acquisitions than expected due to route change
The decision of about thirty pages in the cause which opposes the anti-tram grouping, Quebec deserves better (QMM), with the Municipality fell Thursday in the middle of the morning.
Judge Samson therefore dismissed QMM’s request for a provisional injunction, stating that “the plaintiffs fail in their demonstration of imminent serious and irreparable harm, the balance of convenience and urgency”.
According to him, “stopping work on the Quebec tramway would have infinitely greater consequences than the immediate inconveniences specifically stated by the plaintiffs”.
The judge adds that “this criterion of the balance of inconveniences does not militate in favor of the plaintiffs, the Court cannot for this reason issue a provisional interlocutory injunction”.
That said, Clément Samson recognizes that plaintiffs may have a case to defend in court. According to the “appearance of right” test, QMM’s lawyers “raise issues that can be brought before a court,” he concludes.
The two parties must meet before the judge on August 29 to determine what happens next. A “management conference” is scheduled for that day to determine the dates during which the case could be argued on the merits.
Project in jeopardy
As the Log revealed in its Thursday edition, the tramway project office estimates that the slightest delay in the completion of pre-works can “jeopardize” the megaproject valued at nearly $4 billion.
“A halt in activities and preparatory work at this stage of the project and, consequently, a possible halt in the procurement process aimed at selecting private partners Infra [infrastructures] and MR [matériel roulant] most likely imply a risk of permanent demobilization for the Quebec tramway project,” said the director of the project office, Daniel Genest.
For its part, Quebec deserves better pleads that the tramway project is “illegal” and “unconstitutional” and calls for its immediate stop.
Last week, two lawyers told the Journal that this appeal will be hard to plead.