Legacy: the Supreme Court refuses to hear the challenge of Pierre Karl Péladeau

Legacy: the Supreme Court refuses to hear the challenge of Pierre Karl Péladeau

At the end of 2021, the Quebec Court of Appeal ruled in favor of Anne-Marie Péladeau in a dispute over 20 years old between her and her two brothers on the inheritance from their father.

The Supreme Court of Canada refuses to hear the challenge of Pierre Karl Péladeau and his brother, Érik Péladeau, in a case concerning the paternal inheritance opposing them to their sister, Anne-Marie Péladeau.

Ms. Péladeau was successful in the Superior Court, then in the Court of Appeal. The Péladeau brothers therefore lose their last resort in this case.

The highest court in the country announced Thursday that it would not consider this case.

This decision by the highest court in the land marks the end of a two-decade legal saga for Anne-Marie Péladeau.< /p>

The Péladeau brothers had concluded, through Placements Péladeau inc. (PPI), a $55 million agreement to buy back the shares of Quebecor inherited by their sister, after the death of their father, Pierre Péladeau, founder of the company.

A disagreement on the interpretation of a clause which stated that payments were only to be made if the dividends paid annually to PPI by Quebecor exceeded $4.2 million was at the heart of the dispute which lasted some twenty years. ;years.

The Superior Court ruled that this clause was ambiguous and absurd. The court had thus condemned PPI to pay 36 million dollars to Ms. Péladeau, in addition to interest and indemnity costs.

The court is convinced that Anne-Marie would never have signed the Protocol if it had been clear that it was possible that she would not receive never payment of the sale price if sufficient dividends were not paid to PPI by Quebecor, the judgment read.

The judge had ruled that the clause was not a condition of payment.

This cannot be a conditional obligation since the parties assumed that PPI would receive from Quebecor an amount of annual dividends sufficient for all of the preferred shares classes Y and Z be redeemed, and that the sale price due to Anne-Marie […] therefore be paid by PPI, was it written in the decision subsequently upheld by the Court of Appeal.

The Supreme Court of Canada never discloses the reasons for refusing to hear a case when announcing it.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.

Previous post Arrested for laundering more than $18 million in less than a year
Next post Catalan politicians spied on: Spain opens investigation into Pegasus maker