SAINT-LAMBERT, QC, August 27, 2014
Mr. Eddy Savoie has decided to appeal the decision rendered on August 15, 2014 by the Honourable Gary Morrison of the Superior Court of Québec awarding various monetary amounts (more specifically, nearly $90,000 for legal costs, $10,000 in moral damages and $200,000 in punitive damages) to Ms. Pierrette Thériault-Martel. The $200,000 figure notably constitutes the largest amount for punitive damages ever awarded for a case of this type in Québec.
In spite of various rumours, Mr. Savoie does not challenge - and has never challenged - people’s right to criticize or question. In fact, he merely insisted, in front of the court, that Ms. Thériault-Martel had made false and defamatory statements concerning him. This allegation was clearly confirmed during the cross examination, a factor that should have been taken into consideration by the court prior to penalties being ordered. The Superior Court judge, however, refused to reflect on Ms. Thériault-Martel’s behaviour, despite the obvious proof that her statements regarding Mr. Savoie were false. We wish to reiterate that Mr. Savoie, contrary to Ms. Thériault-Martel’s false allegations, never gave workers or anyone else the horrible order to stop changing the diapers of residents at CHSLD Saint-Lambert sur-le-Golf during an onset of gastroenteritis because “…[translation] the budget was busted.”
From a legal standpoint, the courts require that people seeking remedy in front of a court of law be beyond reproach in the matter being considered. This was not even considered in the case in question.
At this time, Mr. Savoie claims that “…[translation] in spite of the outrageous amount of the judgment, what bothers me most is that the judge failed to consider the substance of the case, namely the defamatory comments made by Ms. Thériault-Martel, which were proven to be false. The legal system needs to take the conduct of both parties into account.” The judge, however, failed to give due consideration to Ms. Thériault-Martel’s fault.
Mr. Savoie adds that “…[translation] this does not constitute me harassing Ms. Martel. I only want the Court of Appeal to re-examine the facts and confirm whether the Superior Court has the right to impose a penalty without taking into account the defamatory comments having initially led to the case in question. I firmly believe that the answer to this question should be of interest to everyone, and of course, to myself. Like the members of my extended family, who are supporting me through this ordeal, I still have faith in the legal system.”
Groupe Savoie, 450 449-1516, email@example.com