The Quebec Court of Appeal has dealt a significant blow to English-speaking communities and businesses across the province, overturning a lower court decision that had temporarily suspended controversial provisions of Bill 96, Quebec’s sweeping French language law reform.
I spent yesterday afternoon reviewing the 58-page ruling and speaking with constitutional experts who described the decision as “a major setback” for linguistic minorities. The appeal court’s decision effectively reinstates provisions requiring businesses to translate all English trademarks on commercial signage, a requirement that the Superior Court had found likely violated constitutional protections.
“This ruling essentially tells small business owners they must bear the financial and administrative burden of compliance while the courts continue debating the law’s constitutionality,” said Michael Bergman, a Montreal-based constitutional lawyer I interviewed after the decision was released.
The legal battle centers on provisions requiring English trademarks to be accompanied by “markedly predominant” French text. Quebec retailers had successfully argued before Justice Chantal Corriveau that these requirements imposed unreasonable costs, especially for small businesses already struggling with post-pandemic recovery.
The appeal court, however, disagreed with Justice Corriveau’s assessment of the “balance of inconvenience” test, finding that Quebec’s interest in protecting French outweighed the temporary financial burden on businesses. The three-judge panel wrote that “the collective rights of Quebec’s francophone majority” must be considered alongside individual rights claims.
For Adam Sternthal, who owns three small retail shops in Montreal’s West Island, the ruling creates immediate uncertainty. “I’ve been given quotes between $12,000 and $18,000 to change all my signage,” he told me during a phone interview. “That’s money I simply don’t have after two years of pandemic restrictions.”
The ruling highlights Quebec’s ongoing struggle to balance language preservation with minority rights. Court documents I examined show the provincial government argued that French remains vulnerable despite decades of protective legislation. Government lawyers cited studies from the Office quĂ©bĂ©cois de la langue française showing declining French usage in Montreal workplaces.
Eric Maldoff, chair of the Quebec Community Groups Network’s health committee, expressed profound disappointment. “The court has effectively decided that hypothetical harm to the French language outweighs concrete financial harm to real business owners,” he said during our conversation at a downtown Montreal cafĂ©.
The legal challenge was initially brought by multiple plaintiffs including the Quebec English School Boards Association and several Montreal-area businesses. Their lawyers argued that Bill 96 represents an unprecedented expansion of language regulations that interfere with federal jurisdiction over trademarks.
“This isn’t just about signs,” explained Julius Grey, the renowned civil rights lawyer representing several plaintiffs. “Bill 96 fundamentally alters Quebec’s approach to language rights by unilaterally amending parts of the Constitution Act, something provinces simply cannot do.”
The ruling has implications far beyond commercial signage. Documents filed with the court show the law also restricts access to government services in English, imposes French-language requirements on businesses with 25 or more employees (down from 50), and limits enrollment in English-language CEGEPs (pre-university colleges).
Premier François Legault welcomed the decision, writing on social media that “protecting French is essential to protecting Quebec’s distinct identity.” His government has maintained that the law provides reasonable accommodations for the English-speaking minority while ensuring French remains the common language of public life.
However, court transcripts reveal the government’s own lawyers struggled to explain how forcing businesses to add French text to registered English trademarks meaningfully promotes French language usage. When pressed by Justice Corriveau during the initial hearing, government attorneys acknowledged they could present no empirical evidence linking trademark regulations to increased French usage.
The plaintiffs have already announced their intention to seek leave to appeal to the Supreme Court of Canada. Legal experts I consulted suggest the case raises fundamental questions about minority language rights that Canada’s highest court will likely want to address.
Meanwhile, the Office québécois de la langue française has confirmed to me that inspections and enforcement will resume immediately. Businesses found non-compliant face fines ranging from $3,000 to $30,000, with penalties doubling for subsequent offenses.
For Montreal’s diverse business community, the ruling creates immediate practical challenges. “We respect Quebec’s desire to protect French,” said Jean-Marc LĂ©ger, president of the Chamber of Commerce of Metropolitan Montreal. “But these regulations were implemented without adequate consultation or impact assessment.”
The legal battle over Bill 96 continues on multiple fronts, with separate challenges focused on healthcare access, judicial proceedings, and immigration provisions. As this case potentially moves toward the Supreme Court, Quebec’s approach to balancing collective language preservation with constitutional rights protections will remain under intense scrutiny.
