Executive Summary: Key Legal and Evidentiary Issues

• Banque de Montréal sought to sever its main claim against Groupe Rock-Sol inc. and its guarantors from the defendants' warranty claim against Investissement Québec.
• Joinder of a main claim and a warranty claim is the procedural default under Quebec civil procedure; severance is the exception requiring affirmative justification.
• The court weighed factors including prejudice from cost and delay, risk of contradictory judgments, judicial economy, the state of advancement of each claim, and the relatedness of the issues.
• Proportionality and sound administration of justice favoured keeping both claims in a single proceeding rather than risking two separate hearings on closely connected issues.
• Investissement Québec's admissibility challenge to the warranty claim was scheduled for hearing in autumn 2026, and its outcome could render the warranty claim moot or allow the matter to proceed swiftly.
• Banque de Montréal failed to discharge its burden of demonstrating that severance was warranted in the circumstances.

Facts of the case

Banque de Montréal commenced proceedings against Groupe Rock-Sol inc. for repayment of commercial loans, and against Antonio Rizzuto and Gianfranco Rizzuto as sureties who had guaranteed the obligations of Groupe Rock-Sol inc. The main action was introduced in September 2025 and had been advancing steadily: a case management conference was held in January 2026, procedural steps agreed upon at that conference had generally been respected, and the defendants had acquiesced to certain hypothecary conclusions sought by the bank and proposed a written examination of the bank's representative.

The defendants, in turn, called Investissement Québec into warranty, alleging that Investissement Québec had itself stood as surety for the debts claimed by the bank. The defendants asked the court to order Investissement Québec to pay 50% of any amounts they might be ordered to pay on the main claim. Investissement Québec contested the admissibility of the warranty claim, and a hearing on that objection was scheduled for October 2026. It was in this context that Banque de Montréal moved to sever the main claim from the warranty claim.

Applicable law and procedural framework

Under Quebec civil procedure, a main claim and a warranty claim joined in the same proceeding are, as a rule, subject to the same case management protocol and are heard and decided together in a single judgment (art. 190 C.p.c.). The court may, in the exercise of its case management powers, order severance (art. 158 C.p.c.), but joinder is the rule and severance remains the exception. The burden falls on the party seeking severance to demonstrate that it is justified. In exercising its discretion, the court considers factors such as prejudice in terms of cost and delay, the risk of contradictory judgments, efficient use of judicial resources, the complexity of the litigation, the advancement of each proceeding, the diligence of the parties, the connection between the issues, common legal and factual bases, and the anticipated duration and cost of the warranty claim hearing — all in accordance with the guiding principles of civil procedure.

Court's reasoning and analysis

The court rejected the bank's motion. It acknowledged that the main claim was relatively straightforward and that the defendants' current defences might raise eyebrows, but found that joinder of both claims remained the approach most consistent with proportionality, judicial economy, and sound administration of justice. On the question of delay, the court found that advancing the main claim would not be significantly impeded by the warranty claim; the admissibility challenge was itself the primary source of any current uncertainty, and that issue would be resolved by autumn 2026. If Investissement Québec's admissibility challenge succeeded, only the main claim would remain and the file would be ready for a hearing on the merits. If the challenge failed, the remaining procedural steps appeared simple enough to be completed promptly.

The court further noted that severing the two claims risked producing two separate hearings in a matter where it would be necessary to establish the amounts of the alleged debts and to examine the respective responsibilities of Groupe Rock-Sol inc., the Rizzuto guarantors, and Investissement Québec. Conducting two separate hearings in that context would serve neither sound administration of justice nor judicious use of judicial resources. The court also noted that any potential reduction in the duration or cost of the main hearing from severance would not be significant, as the matter did not involve a large number of parties or procedural incidents capable of materially complicating or prolonging the proceedings. Finally, the court emphasized that case management measures remain revisable as the file evolves and difficulties arise.

Ruling and outcome

The court dismissed Banque de Montréal's motion to sever the main claim from the warranty claim. The defendants — Groupe Rock-Sol inc., Antonio Rizzuto, and Gianfranco Rizzuto — were the successful parties on this motion, with costs awarded in their favour. No specific monetary amount was ordered at this stage, as the judgment dealt solely with the procedural question of severance; the underlying claims for loan repayment and the warranty claim against Investissement Québec remain to be determined on the merits.