Background

• Dan Petrascu, of Romanian origin, sued the Société de l'assurance automobile du Québec (SAAQ) for $65,000, claiming discrimination during his job interview for a road inspector position.
• He alleged that his immigrant background negatively affected his hiring chances despite SAAQ’s employment equity program.
• His complaint to the Commission des droits de la personne et des droits de la jeunesse (CDPDJ) was dismissed, prompting him to file a lawsuit.

Key Legal Issues

1. SAAQ’s Claim of Immunity

   • The court ruled that SAAQ does not have immunity in this case, as hiring employees is not an official function under its governing law.

2. Discrimination Allegation

   • The court found that while two interviewers noted Petrascu’s immigrant status and rated his response as “unfavorable,” there was no evidence it influenced the final hiring decision.
   • Discrimination "prima facie" was established, but the SAAQ successfully justified its decision based on merit.
   • Petrascu’s interview performance declined in the second half, failing to meet required competencies.

3. Was the Lawsuit Abusive?

   • The SAAQ argued Petrascu’s claim was frivolous and abusive.
   • The court rejected this, stating his concerns were legitimate given the lack of transparency in the interview process.

Final Decision

• Petrascu’s claim was dismissed as no unlawful discrimination was found.
• SAAQ’s counterclaim for abuse of process was also rejected.
• Each party bore their own legal costs.
• The court did not award damages to either party.