In a ruling released Thursday, Justice Peter Browne wrote that the case will face fewer procedural barriers in Quebec than in Newfoundland and Labrador.“None of the parties has a substantial connection to Newfoundland and Labrador,” Browne said. “The only connecting factor is that the parties were participants in a meeting held here in the summer of 2018.”
A hearing about the jurisdictional dispute was held in Newfoundland and Labrador Supreme Court on June 6. During the hearing, Marshall argued that the claim should be heard in Newfoundland and Labrador since that’s where the incidents allegedly occurred.Trudeau Foundation accused of delaying sex harassment lawsuit, insisting it be heard in Quebec
In an interview, Marshall said she was disappointed with Browne’s decision, adding that she was still concerned his ruling would prompt her client to end her case. But her misgivings and criticisms are with the Trudeau foundation and the court system, not with Browne, she said. The case has now been tied up in the courts in two provinces over several years, which has re-traumatized Smiley, she said. If Smiley continues, “she’s going to have to completely restart her case in Quebec, a province where she is not proficient in the language. She’s going to have to find a brand-new lawyer, she’s going to have to start from scratch. It’s just not right.”