Taxi drivers go to Supreme Court against Quebec
Jean Numa Goudou ·
On May 26, a request for leave to appeal to the Supreme Court of Canada, challenging the Quebec Court of Appeal ruling, was filed.
Wilfrid Ciriac, alias Big, 79, bought his taxi permit (a term that no longer exists in today's law) in 1980. He had paid $12,000 for it with a bank loan. In his mind, it was as if Big had bought a house and was looking toward his retirement one day thanks to his investment.
But in 2019, the Quebec government abolished the permits of 5,800 taxi owners. For many holders, this represented the fruit of a lifetime of work. That same year, Quebec implemented a pilot project that introduced Uber into the industry, permanently. Quebec reimbursed the holders based on the non-indexed acquisition cost instead of market value.
Big received $75,000 as part of this "disguised expropriation." Not even enough to pay the debts he had contracted over the years. "I had thought I would receive the difference, the $100,000 I was missing, but..." sighs the man who will soon turn 80 and who had to put away his taxi car in 2020 due to old age and illness.
Wilfrid Ciriac, alias Big
Wilfrid Ciriac lost an eye in the meantime and can no longer work as before. "I was counting on selling my permit for my retirement. I'm on old age assistance today from the federal government. That's all. I don't have a Quebec pension," deplores the former taxi worker.
For his part, Dama Metellus held two permits. One bought for $155,000 and the other for $170,000. He was reimbursed at the purchase price by the government with "taxpayers' money." To some extent, he considers that he fared better than many of his colleagues. Better than Big at least.
Yet, he is the one who just filed, on May 26, an application for leave to appeal to the Supreme Court of Canada, challenging the Quebec Court of Appeal ruling (Attorney General of Quebec v. Metellus, 2026 QCCA 395) rendered on March 25, 2026. This court had overturned the Superior Court decision that partially sided with the drivers.
Dama Metellus, the man behind the appeal to the Supreme Court
"I hate injustice," responds Dama Metellus when In Texto asks him why he is doing this.
"Permit holders made their investment decisions within a regulatory framework strictly controlled by the government. They did so in good faith, based on rules established by the State itself, relying on their belief that Quebec's rule of law was real and trustworthy. We cannot deny their sense of injustice today," states his lawyer, Me Bruce Johnston, in a press release.
In addition to Johnston, a battery of lawyers is working on this class action, including Me Lex Gill and Me Anne-Isabelle Cloutier from the firm Trudel Johnston & Lespérance, Me Wilerne Bernard, Me Myriam Moussignac and Me Marc-Antoine Cloutier from the firm Triviüm.
"It's as if the government prevented us from selling our own house that we had kept as a nest egg," remarks Dama Metellus. "I had planned my retirement at 55 with my two permits. But I can no longer do it."
WHAT'S AT STAKE
In 2024, the Quebec Superior Court found the injustice and ordered the Quebec government to pay more than $143 million in expropriation compensation to group members.
The Court of Appeal decision overturning the Superior Court raises important questions concerning established principles of property law and disguised expropriation, according to the class action lawyers. "It departs from Supreme Court teachings and deprives thousands of former owners of fundamental legal protection.
The ruling also raises questions that weaken the legal protection enjoyed by other types of property, such as agricultural quotas, patents, and mining rights, and risks undermining public confidence in the rule of law," they argue.
NEXT STEPS
The Attorney General of Quebec has 30 days to respond to the application. The Supreme Court should render its decision on leave to appeal in the coming months.
"I always keep hope. There are some among my colleagues who no longer believe. But as long as I'm alive, I will keep hope of winning," affirms Big, the 79-year-old man who lost almost everything in 2019.