Executive Summary: Key Legal and Evidentiary Issues

• Groupe Santé IPA inc. sought leave to appeal a Superior Court judgment dismissing its motion for a stay of execution.
   
• The underlying decision by the Autorité des marchés publics revoked the company's authorization to contract with public bodies until June 25, 2031.
   
• Justice Hardy considered whether the conditions under article 31 paragraph 2 of the Code of Civil Procedure were satisfied for granting leave to appeal.
   
• Proportionality under article 18 C.C.P. and the interest of justice under article 9 paragraph 3 C.C.P. were both assessed as part of the leave analysis.
   
• A key evidentiary concern was whether the appeal and the pending judicial review would become moot without a stay.
   
• Timelines were also set for the filing of the parties' respective appellate briefs.
   

Facts of the case

Groupe Santé IPA inc. applied for leave to appeal a judgment rendered on July 9, 2026 by the Superior Court (the Honourable Jacques Blanchard), which had dismissed its motion for a stay of execution. That motion was ancillary to the company's application for judicial review of a decision rendered on June 26, 2026 by the Autorité des marchés publics (the "Decision"). The Decision placed Groupe Santé IPA inc. on the Register of Enterprises Ineligible for Public Contracts, barring it from contracting or subcontracting with any public body until June 25, 2031. Because the company derives the large majority of its revenue from public contracts, it also sought a stay of that Decision pending the outcome of its appeal.

Policy and legislative provisions at issue

The application for leave to appeal was assessed under article 31 paragraph 2 of the Code of Civil Procedure. Justice Hardy also considered whether the intended appeal served the interest of justice under article 9 paragraph 3 C.C.P., and whether it satisfied the principle of proportionality set out in article 18 C.C.P. The deadlines and page limits for the parties' briefs were governed by articles 13 and 58 of the Regulation of the Court of Appeal in Civil Matters, along with Registrar's Notice No. 3.

Reasoning and analysis

Without expressing any view on the merits of the appeal, Justice Hardy found that the submissions made at the hearing satisfied him that the statutory conditions for leave to appeal were met. He further found that the intended appeal was in the interest of justice and consistent with the principle of proportionality. Turning to the request for a stay, he concluded that it should be granted because, absent a stay, the application for judicial review and the appeal itself risked becoming moot. Justice Hardy referenced two prior Court of Appeal decisions in support of this reasoning: Société canadienne pour la prévention de la cruauté envers les animaux v. Ville de Longueuil and Dal Pozzo Nizard v. Collège des médecins du Québec.

Ruling and overall outcome

Justice Hardy granted Groupe Santé IPA inc.'s application for leave to appeal from the Superior Court's July 9, 2026 judgment, along with the accompanying motion for a stay. He ordered a stay of execution of Decision No. 2026-DPI-2910, which had revoked the company's authorization to contract or subcontract with public bodies, to remain in effect until the earlier of the Court of Appeal ruling on the merits or the Superior Court's judicial review proceedings concluding. The matter was placed on the roll for November 4, 2026, with the appellant's brief due August 14, 2026 and the respondent's brief due September 14, 2026. Costs were ordered to follow the outcome of the appeal, meaning no specific monetary amount was awarded at this stage.