In Quebec, disputes are resolved through ordinary judicial process or through dispute prevention and resolution (DPR) processes that are based on a voluntary and cooperation-based approach.

The DPR processes consider all the aspects of the dispute, as well as the interests of the parties, in search for a mutually satisfactory solution.

The DPR may simply include an agreement reached between the parties through negotiation or may be guided by an impartial person, such as a mediator or an arbitrator. Several approaches involving the presence of an impartial authority may be pursued by the parties, such as :

Mediation : process in which the mediator assists the parties in finding a solution to their dispute by identifying their respective needs and interests. The mediator does not render a decision but can facilitate the negotiation; if the parties reach an agreement, it is typically formalized in a settlement and release (transaction et quittance) which constitutes a binding agreement and puts an end to the dispute. Mediation can be used even in situation where ordinary judicial process or legal proceedings are not being considered.

Conciliation : informal and confidential process in which the conciliator helps the parties find a satisfactory solution to their dispute. The process is similar to mediation, the distinction being that the conciliator is generally a person representing the justice system or the public administration. Conciliation finds particular application in labour and employment disputes, family matters, lessor and lessee disputes, as well as disputes involving the government or a public administration.

Arbitration : private and confidential process in which the dispute is settled by an arbitrator whose decision is generally final and cannot be appealed. Arbitration is available at any stage of a dispute and is a strong alternative to court trial as hearings can normally be arranged more quickly. This process requires the agreement of both parties. It may, however, be imposed upon the parties by operation of a contractual clause.

Settlement conference : alternative and confidential process during the proceedings in which a judge presides the conference and facilitates a dialogue between the parties to help them assess their positions and explore a mutually satisfactory solution. Settlement conference is held at no charge to the parties and without formality. The parties make the final decision and if a settlement is reached the judge may homologate the transaction.

It is important to note that, as of January 1st, 2016, in accordance with the Code of Civil Procedure, the parties are required to consider DPR processes before referring their case to the courts.

In Quebec, civil and commercial litigation is governed by the Code of Civil Procedure (C.C.P.), as amended on January 1st, 2016, by an Act to establish the New Code of civil procedure. The C.C.P. establishes the principles of civil justice and governs the procedure applicable to DPR, the procedure applicable before courts, as well as the execution of judgments and judicial sales.

The C.C.P. provides the guiding principles and the general framework of civil procedure, founded on the principle of proportionality, good faith, and cooperation between the parties throughout the proceedings, as well as the adversarial principle. Together with the Civil Code of Quebec, the C.C.P. constitutes the primary legislative framework governing civil and commercial litigation in Quebec.

Quebec’s judicial courts system is organised as a three-tier hierarchy.

At first tier, in first instance, civil and commercial claims are usually brought before either the Court of Quebec or the Superior Court, depending on the amount at stake and the nature of the dispute.

Court of Quebec :

The Court of Quebec has exclusive jurisdiction to hear and determine applications in which the value of the subject matter of the dispute or the amount claimed is less than $75,000, and concurrent jurisdiction with the Superior Court, at the plaintiff’s option, where that value or amount is equal to or exceeds $75,000 but is less than $100,000. The action brought before the Court of Quebec automatically proceed under the simplified procedure that aims to lower the cost of litigation by reducing procedural complexity.

The Court of Quebec is also constituted of a Small Claims Division which offers simplified and accessible procedure for claims not exceeding 15,000$, in which legal representation is not permitted : parties must represent themselves, without a lawyer.

Superior Court :

The Superior Court has concurrent jurisdiction with the Court of Quebec for claims exceeding 75,000 and less than 100,000$, at the plaintiff’s option, and exclusive jurisdiction for claims exceeding 100,000$. The Superior Court has exclusive jurisdiction to hear and determine class actions and applications for an injunction, as well as judicial review.

At the second tier, on appeal, judgments rendered by the Court of Quebec and the Superior Court may be brought before the Court of Appeal of Quebec, which is the appellate court of the province. Appeals are generally heard by a panel of three judges, who review the judgment to determine if the court committed an error, whether it is an error in fact or in law or in a combination of the two.

At the third tier, the Supreme Court of Canada is the highest court of the judicial order and the final court of appeal for all Canadian jurisdictions, including Quebec. Leave to appeal must be obtained from the Supreme Court, which generally grants it when the case raises a question of public importance of national scope or that relates to unsettled areas of law. If it does not agree to hear a case, the decision of the Court of Appeal of Quebec stands.

The period of time from commencing proceedings to trial usually depends on the complexity of the dispute, the procedural incident that may arise in the course of the proceedings, and the availability of court dates in the judicial district where the proceedings are conducted.

The C.C.P. gives parties a period a period a little over six months from the commencement of proceedings to complete all procedural steps and declare their case ready to be set down for trial. However, extension of time is often sought in practice, as the complexity of the matter may render the prescribed delays difficult to meet for parties; any such extension must be authorized by the court, which plays an active role in supervising the proceedings to ensure its progression. It can typically take one (1) to two (2) years for parties to declare their case ready for trial.

In major urban centres such as Montreal, once the declaration of trial readiness has been filed, parties may face additional delays of several months before trial, as available complex matters requiring multiple hearing dates may be more difficult to schedule given the limited availability on the court’s calendar.

As a general rule, hearings are held in public and conducted openly, allowing the public to witness the decision-making process. It is known as open court principle, and it serves to maintain public confidence in the justice system. Some hearings will, however, be held in-camera, in particular in family and youth protection matters.

As for the documents, they are available to the public upon request to the court’s registry, except for the documents placed under a sealing or a confidentiality order.

In Quebec, limitation periods are governed by the Civil Code of Quebec (C.C.Q.), which establishes a general prescription period of three (3) years applicable to most civil and commercial claims starting from the day giving rise to a cause of action.

The three-year limitation period begins to run from the date the person possesses sufficient knowledge of the facts giving rise to the claim to reasonably be expected to act upon them.

However, the law provides for several exceptions with shorter or longer limitation periods. For instance, the right to claim damages for defamation is limited to a one-year limitation period starting when the person becomes aware of the harm caused by it. On the contrary, the right to claim damages for bodily injury resulting from violent behaviour suffered during childhood, sexual violence or spousal violence cannot be prescribed.

As the limitation period is of public order, it cannot be derogated from. However, the limitation periods can be suspended or interrupted naturally or civilly. Following its interruption, the limitation period begins to run again for the same period, while suspension simply pauses the running of the limitation period, without resetting it entirely.

To prevent and resolve disputes and avoid litigation, the C.C.P., since January 1st, 2016, requires parties to consider private dispute prevention and resolution (DPR) before referring their dispute to the courts. However, the process remains voluntary and cannot be imposed on any party, as the obligation only extends to the consideration of DPR and does not consist of an obligatory prerequisite for the commencement of the proceedings.

In addition to this obligation, it is generally suggested to a party intending to commence proceedings to send to the other party a formal notice (mise en demeure) before taking legal action to give the other party a concrete opportunity to perform or fulfill its obligation. For monetary claims, the formal notice also marks the starting point for the interest and additional indemnities to accrue.

In Quebec, proceedings are initiated by the filing of an originating application (demande introductive d’instance) which also has to be subsequently served on the defendant by a bailiff. Service must be effected by the bailiff appointed by the plaintiff, since courts do not effect service on behalf of the parties.

The originating application contains a statement of the facts, the law supporting the claim, the exhibits in support, the conclusions sought by the plaintiff, as well as a notice to the defendant indicating the delay within which a response must be filed.

In domestic disputes, territorial jurisdiction is determined pursuant to the C.C.P. which provides that the court having territorial jurisdiction is generally the court of the domicile of the defendant or, at the plaintiff’s option, it may be the court where :

(1) the contract was made;
(2) the injurious act or omission occurred (extracontractual civil liability); or
(3) the place where the immovable property subject to the dispute is wholly or partly situated.

Certain categories of disputes are subject to specific jurisdictional rules, including the following :

If the claim pertains to an employment contract or a consumer contract, the court having jurisdiction is the court of the domicile or residence of the employee or the consumer, regardless of whether that person is the plaintiff or the defendant.

If the claim pertains to insurance matters, the court having jurisdiction is the court of the domicile or residence of the insured or, where applicable, of the beneficiary under the insurance contract. In the particular case of property insurance, the court of the place where the loss occurred also has jurisdiction.

If the claim pertains to the exercise of a hypothecary right on the debtor’s main residence, jurisdiction lies with the court of the place where that residence is situated.

In international disputes, territorial jurisdiction is determined pursuant to the C.C.Q., which provides that Quebec authorities may generally have jurisdiction when the defendant is domiciled in Quebec or in some cases where the subject of the claim has sufficient connection with Quebec. The court must then determine whether it has jurisdiction before addressing the claim in itself.

Moreover, Quebec authority that has jurisdiction may, on an application by a party, exceptionally decline to hear a dispute where the authorities of another State are in a better position to decide the matter.

Alternatively, a Quebec authority that would otherwise lack jurisdiction may nonetheless assume jurisdiction where the dispute has a sufficient connection with Quebec and proceedings abroad prove impossible or cannot reasonably be required.

When a dispute presents an international or foreign element, the court determines the applicable substantive law pursuant to the private international law rules contained in the C.C.Q., which sets out the relevant connecting factors to identify the governing law in cross-border civil and commercial matters.

Contracts are governed by the law chosen by the parties. If no law is designated in the contract, the courts apply the law of the State with which the act is most closely connected in view of its nature and the attendant circumstances.

In matters of extracontractual liability, the applicable law is that of the State where the act or omission giving rise to the injury occurred.

There are some mechanisms that allow a party to obtain the dismissal of a claim at an early stage of the proceedings by bringing a preliminary exception asking that an application or a defence be dismissed if :

(1) where the dispute is already pending before another court or if the matter has already been adjudicated upon;
(2) one the parties is incapable or lacks the necessary capacity to act; or
(3) one the parties clearly has no interest in the proceedings.

A party may also seek dismissal on the ground that the application or defence is unfounded in law, even if the facts alleged are true. Such an exception may pertain to only part of the application or defence.

There are several interim remedies provided for in the C.C.P. which are temporary in nature and remain in effect for the duration of the proceedings until the dispute is brought to a final resolution, whether through a judgment or a settlement between the parties.

The Superior Court of Quebec has exclusive jurisdiction to hear and determine injunctions matters.

Injunction :

An injunction is a discretionary and exceptional remedy by which the court orders a person to refrain from or cease doing something, or to perform a specified act. It may be provisional, interlocutory or permanent. The C.C.P. allows for multiple forms of injunctive relief :

(1) Anton Piller : injunction which compels the defendant to permit the plaintiff to search for, inspect, and seize critical evidence without any prior warning. Its purpose is to prevent the defendant from destroying the evidence.

(2) Mareva : injunction which freezes the defendant’s assets to prevent their dissipation pending judgment.

(3) Norwich : injunction which orders a third party to disclose information or documents about a specific person, even prior to the commencement of formal proceedings.

(4) Safeguard order : exceptional and discretionary measure issued pending a provisional interlocutory order intended to temporarily restore the balance between the parties’ opposing interests and the status quo.

Alongside injunctive relief, the C.C.P. also provides for seizure before judgment as a conservatory measure.

Seizure before judgment :

Seizure before judgment is a conservatory measure by which the court authorises the seizure of the defendant’s assets located in Quebec prior to the rendering of a final judgment. Its purpose is to preserve the defendant’s assets and to ensure that they remain available to satisfy a future judgment should the plaintiff prevail on the merits.

In Quebec, proceedings are essentially conducted orally, but the parties are required to file and exchange several written documents throughout the course of the proceedings, in accordance with the C.C.P.

Once the proceedings have commenced by the filing and serving of an originating application, the defendant must answer the application within the following 15 days, failing which a default judgment may be rendered. The answer either states the defendant’s intention to negotiate a settlement or defend the application and establish a case protocol with the plaintiff. The defendant is additionally required to file a brief outline of the arguments made in support of its defence and stating its position and possibly raising counterclaims.

Following the defendant’s answer, the parties must jointly agree on a case protocol within 45 days from the service of the originating application. The case protocol is negotiated between the parties and sets out the procedural timetable governing the proceedings.

The obligation to disclose relevant documents permeates the entire conduct of the proceedings. Its reach is not unlimited, however, and may be tempered by considerations of relevance, privilege or legitimate interests, each of which may justify restricting or excluding the communication of certain documents.

The documents subject to any applicable privileges or confidentiality protections are not required to be disclosed to the other party, unless waived by the person benefiting from it or ordered to be disclosed by a court order. The most common categories of privilege are :

(1) professional secrecy which protects all communications and documents exchanged between a party and a professional that are intended to be made in confidence for the purpose of receiving a professional service.

(2) litigation privilege which protects communications and documents exchanged or prepared for the main purpose of litigation.

(3) trade secret which protects the information that has real or potential commercial value and is considered to be a secret. However, the court may order that such information be disclosed where it is relevant to the dispute and the interests of justice so require, subject to appropriate measures to preserve its confidentiality, such as the sealing of the information or that it be only disclosed to the parties’ lawyers and the experts.

A party may obtain additional documents or information from the opposing party by way of an undertaking typically given in the course of a pre-trial examination called « discovery ». The communication of documents allows each party to gauge the relative merits of the case, to identify possible issues and to assess the reliability of the evidence and testimony likely to be adduced at trial.

The C.C.P. requires each party to communicate the documents on which it intends to rely on at trial. This ensures that neither party is taken by surprise by evidence it was not given the opportunity to examine and respond to in advance.

As a general rule, evidence at trial in Quebec is presented through oral witness testimony and documentary evidence. Each witness is first examined by the party that retained them, and then subject to cross-examination by opposing counsel, which may extend beyond the matters raised in chief to encompass any issue touching on the witness’s credibility.

The C.C.P. permits parties to conduct pre-trial examination which are transcribed into stenographic notes. The transcript of such examinations may subsequently be used at trial to establish a contradiction between the witness’s prior out-of-court statements and their testimony at trial, thereby undermining their credibility.

The expert’s report stands in lieu of their oral testimony in principle, on the condition that it be filed prior to the matter being set down for trial. Notwithstanding this general rule, a party retains the right to call the expert to clarify points in the report or to address newly discovered findings. All other examinations of the expert are subject to prior court authorisation.

Expert evidence is permitted and experts can be retained by the parties (joint expert or each party retaining its own expert) or appointed by the court. The C.C.P. encourages the appointment of a joint expert wherever possible as a matter of proportionality.

Experts act under their professional oath and are required to give an opinion on the points submitted to them with independence, objectivity and impartiality, independently of any obligation toward the retaining party. The court is not bound by the expert’s opinion.

The expert’s opinion is contained in a written report. A party intending to rely on an expert report during a trial, which is usually announced in the case protocol, must communicate the report with the other party before the matter is set down for trial.

Final and interim decisions can be appealed to the Court of Appeal of Quebec, before which appeals must generally be initiated within 30 days of the notice of judgment.

An appeal may be brought either as of right, in which case the appellant only has to file and serve a notice of appeal, or by permission, in which case the appellant has to file and serve both a leave to appeal and a notice of appeal. The notice of appeal suspends the execution of the judgment.

Appeals as of right do not require the permission from the Court of Appeal of Quebec. Such appeals lie against final judgments of the Court of Quebec and the Superior Court that conclude a proceeding or relate to matters of to personal integrity, status or capacity, the special rights of the State or contempt of court.

Appeals requiring a leave of the Court of Appeal of Quebec concern judgments whose subject matter falls below 60 000$, or involves a question of principle, a new issue or an issue of law that has given rise to conflicting judicial decisions. Generally, case management measures and rulings on procedural matters cannot be appealed, unless the measure or ruling appears unreasonable.

A decision of the Court of Appeal is enforceable immediately. It may, however, be suspended with permission of the court if the party shows that it intends to bring an application for leave to appeal to the Supreme Court of Canada.

The recognition and enforcement of foreign judgments in Quebec is governed by the C.C.Q., which sets out both the conditions for recognition and the grounds on which recognition may be refused.

As a general rule, a foreign judgment is recognised and declared enforceable in Quebec, except in the following cases :

(1) the authority of the State where the decision was rendered had no jurisdiction.

(2) the decision is still subject to an ordinary remedy or is not yet final or enforceable in the jurisdiction where it was rendered.

(3) the decision was rendered in contravention of the fundamental principles of procedure.

(4) the same dispute has already been decided in Quebec, is pending before a Quebec authority, or has been resolved in a third State whose decision is entitled to recognition in Quebec.

(5) the outcome of the foreign decision is manifestly contrary to public order.

(6) the decision enforces obligations arising from the taxation laws of a foreign State.

The party seeking to enforce a foreign judgment in Quebec, must file and serve an originating application in the Superior Court of Quebec or in the Court of Quebec, depending on the amount at stake.

The successful party may seek reimbursement of its legal costs once judgement has been rendered. Legal costs are defined as all necessary court costs and fees such as bailiff costs, stenographer fees, and court stamps.

The general rule is that each party pays their own extrajudicial legal fees (lawyer fees), regardless of who wins the case. The reimbursement of legal fees by the ‘’losing’’ party is the exception to the rule and is only granted if the party is found to have engaged itself in abuse of process, such as acting in bad faith, pursuing a claim or defence that is manifestly unfounded, or conducting the proceedings in a dilatory or vexatious manner. Proving an abuse of rights is a heavy burden, and courts are reluctant to impose such sanctions lightly.

The rules governing class actions proceedings are set out in the C.C.P. Class actions necessitate two procedural steps : (1) authorization, and (2) trial on the merits.

The authorization :

The applicant must obtain authorization from the Superior Court, which allows the court to verify at the outset that the proposed class action meets the prescribed conditions and to filter out claims that are not suitable to proceed as class actions. The court does not render a decision on the merits of the case. The plaintiff must satisfy the court that :

(1) the claims of the group members raise identical, similar or related issues of law or fact.

(2) the facts alleged appear to justify the conclusions sought.

(3) the composition of the class makes it difficult or impracticable to apply the rules for mandates to take part in judicial proceedings on behalf of others or for consolidation of proceedings; and

(4) the class member appointed as representative plaintiff is in a position to properly represent the class members.

The trial on the merits :

Once the class action is authorized by the Superior Court, the applicant will have to file an originating application for the class actions. The proceedings then continue in accordance with the procedural rules set out in the C.C.P., subject to the specific provisions governing class actions.

A third-party intervention in ongoing proceedings is permitted, subject to the provision of the C.C.P. Such intervention may arise in two ways: either it is voluntary and the third-party voluntarily joins the proceedings to assert its own claim or for the sole purpose of participating in argument, or it is forced and the third-party is summoned into the proceedings by a party that has a claim against it or an interest in having the judgment rendered against it as well.

As regards to the consolidation of proceedings, the court may order that two or more proceedings between the same parties brought before the same court be consolidated as long as it does not result in undue delay or serious prejudice to a third party.

There are no particular statutes or regulations governing third party funding. However, Quebec does not recognize champerty doctrine, which prohibits the financing of lawsuits by third parties in exchange for a share of the proceeds. While not expressly regulated, such arrangements are not contrary to public order but remain rarely encountered in Quebec civil litigation.

The COVID-19 pandemic has accelerated the modernisation and digitisation of court proceedings in Quebec, as courts swiftly adapted to the public health restrictions by transitioning to remote hearings conducted by videoconference.

At the height of the pandemic, the Quebec government also suspended limitation periods by ministerial order. These suspensions were lifted on the 1st of September 2020.

The main advantage of litigating in Quebec is the accessibility and sophistication of its legal system. Quebec offers a bilingual, bijural legal environment, a well-developed body of commercial case-law, and a procedural framework that actively encourages the amicable resolution of disputes.

The main disadvantage of litigating international commercial disputes in Quebec is the limited jurisdiction of Quebec courts over foreign matters. As discussed above, Quebec authorities may only assume jurisdiction where a sufficient connection exists between the dispute and the province, which may prove restrictive in purely international transactions where the parties, the assets and the place of performance of the obligations are all located outside Quebec.

The areas of data privacy driven by the full implementation of Quebec’s Act respecting the protection of personal information in the private sector (Law 25) and ESG accountability are the most likely growth areas for commercial disputes in Quebec over the next five years. Alongside these areas, the rapid development of artificial intelligence has simultaneously heightened cybersecurity vulnerabilities and intensified intellectual property risks, giving rise to a new and expanding category of commercial disputes.

The impact of technology on commercial litigation in Quebec could be significant. Remote hearings and electronic filing are now firmly embedded in courts’ practice directions. On the other hand, artificial intelligence is increasingly used as a tool for document analysis and legal research, though its use carries risks. The Superior Court of Quebec rendered a landmark decision in October 2025, sanctioning the inappropriate use of artificial intelligence in litigation, signalling that courts will hold litigants and counsel strictly accountable for AI-generated errors.

Perhaps most significantly, technology holds the potential to meaningfully improve access to justice in Quebec.