Une entreprise tentait de l’obliger à révéler ses sources. Un juge lui a finalement donné gain de cause...
Marie-Ève Maillé, docteure de l’UQAM, n’aurait finalement pas à dévoiler ses sources, dans le cadre d’une affaire opposant des citoyens à une compagnie.
Me Bogdan Catanu défendait la professeureMardi, le juge Marc St-Pierre a en effet conclu que « les informations confidentielles recueillies par Mme Maillée dans sa recherche scientifique sont protégées par un privilège de confidentialité au cas par cas en application du test de Wigmore. La citation à comparaître a été cassée et Mme Maillé n’a plus d’obligation de fournir les informations demandées », explique son avocat, Me Bogdan Catanu, du cabinet Woods qui la défendait en pro bono avec sa consoeur, Me Laurence Ste-Marie.
Dans le jugement, on peut lire que la demande de l’entreprise Éoliennes de l’Érable « la forcerait à rompre des engagements pris autant vis-à-vis des participants à son enquête qui lui ont fait confiance que vis-à-vis des organismes ayant supervisé ou financé sa recherche ».
Mais aussi : « l’intérêt public démontré l’emporte définitivement sur la recherche de la vérité dans le présent dossier ».
Mme Maillée avait étudié un conflit social entre des résidents et la compagnie Éoliennes de l’Érable. Dans ce cadre-là, la compagnie exigeait l’obtention des identités de 93 personnes qui avaient participé à l’étude menée par la chercheuse qui portait sur la détérioration du climat social dans les communautés où son parc éolien a été construit.
Ce jugement demeure sujet à appel par Éoliennes de l’Érable. La compagnie est de son côté défendue par Me Jean-François Bienjonetti qui exerce entre autres en litige environnemental et litige de construction au cabinet BCF.
That's good news
In my court arguments I often cite research papers from UQAM students. There's no better authority. I'm glad that I can continue to do so without conflict.
Uquam and GW Bush
DSG, didn't Great Britain and the US partly base their decision to invade Irak on what ended up being an essay from a 12 year old student in England? Whatever justifies the end!
Really
I think that I've read every conspiracy theory out there as to why the U.S. invaded Iraq but I haven't seen that one. In case you're interested Frontline has a great episode on that which is not only the most convincing, but also the one that makes the most sense (regardless of whether or not you agree with the invasion). You can probably Google it.
I'll look it up. The invasion of Iraq was in my mind was the first of a succession of mistakes. The Middle East remained relatively stable when a collection of petty dictators kept their neighbours in check. We'll enventually end up with a gigantic theocracy, which does not bode well for the future of the planet.
More
Wow, an intelligent conversation on Droit Inc. Who would have thought?
I recently saw an interesting report by Fareed Zakaria's on the creation of ISIS. The theory is that Paul Bremer made a colossal mistake in firing the existing personnel in the Iraqi military and replacing them with new recruits. So these men, who were only doing their jobs, found themselves unemployed and armed to the teeth, hence many joined ISIS.
Military personnel
Indeed. Senior army personnel under Saddam were Sunni. Not only were they fired and literally unemployable, they were replaced by Shiites, who had been abused under Saddam. Backed by Iran, the a Shiite military men took their revenge against former Sunni army men, a perfect recipe for a civil war. In addition, the hatred between Sunnis and Shiites has been around for a thousand years. Talk about a big mess.
Bravo!
Toutes mes félicitations à Mes Catanu et Ste-Marie, ainsi qu'au cabinet Woods pour avoir accepté de prendre ce dossier pro bono. C'était un dossier difficile où la raison et le bon sens étaient de leur côté, mais il fallait tout de même que le juge accepte de renverser son propre jugement. Alors chapeau!
I don't get it
What does this have to do with Iraq?
Remarque
Votre commentaire doit être approuvé par un modérateur avant d’être affiché.
NETiquette sur les commentaires
Les commentaires sont les bienvenus sur le site. Ils sont validés par la Rédaction avant d’être
publiés et exclus s’ils présentent un caractère injurieux, raciste ou diffamatoire. Si malgré
cette politique de modération, un commentaire publié sur le site vous dérange, prenez
immédiatement contact par courriel (info@droit-inc.com) avec la Rédaction. Si votre demande
apparait légitime, le commentaire sera retiré sur le champ. Vous pouvez également utiliser
l’espace dédié aux commentaires pour publier, dans les mêmes conditions de validation, un droit
de réponse.
DSG
il y a 7 ansIn my court arguments I often cite research papers from UQAM students. There's no better authority. I'm glad that I can continue to do so without conflict.
Mtre
il y a 7 ansDSG, didn't Great Britain and the US partly base their decision to invade Irak on what ended up being an essay from a 12 year old student in England? Whatever justifies the end!
DSG
il y a 7 ansI think that I've read every conspiracy theory out there as to why the U.S. invaded Iraq but I haven't seen that one. In case you're interested Frontline has a great episode on that which is not only the most convincing, but also the one that makes the most sense (regardless of whether or not you agree with the invasion). You can probably Google it.
Mtre
il y a 7 ansThanks DSG,
I'll look it up. The invasion of Iraq was in my mind was the first of a succession of mistakes. The Middle East remained relatively stable when a collection of petty dictators kept their neighbours in check. We'll enventually end up with a gigantic theocracy, which does not bode well for the future of the planet.
DSG
il y a 7 ansWow, an intelligent conversation on Droit Inc. Who would have thought?
I recently saw an interesting report by Fareed Zakaria's on the creation of ISIS. The theory is that Paul Bremer made a colossal mistake in firing the existing personnel in the Iraqi military and replacing them with new recruits. So these men, who were only doing their jobs, found themselves unemployed and armed to the teeth, hence many joined ISIS.
Mtre
il y a 7 ansIndeed. Senior army personnel under Saddam were Sunni. Not only were they fired and literally unemployable, they were replaced by Shiites, who had been abused under Saddam. Backed by Iran, the a Shiite military men took their revenge against former Sunni army men, a perfect recipe for a civil war. In addition, the hatred between Sunnis and Shiites has been around for a thousand years. Talk about a big mess.
DSG
il y a 7 ansYou know your stuff. I agree. I think it'll get a lot worse before it gets better, unfortunately.
Anonyme
il y a 7 ansToutes mes félicitations à Mes Catanu et Ste-Marie, ainsi qu'au cabinet Woods pour avoir accepté de prendre ce dossier pro bono. C'était un dossier difficile où la raison et le bon sens étaient de leur côté, mais il fallait tout de même que le juge accepte de renverser son propre jugement. Alors chapeau!
DSG
il y a 7 ansWhat does this have to do with Iraq?