Course:Law3020/2014WT1/Group G/Case Overview

Section 11 of the Hospital Insurance Act
11. No insurer may enter into or maintain an insurance contract that includes coverage for the cost of an insured service furnished to a resident.

No person may establish or maintain an employee benefit plan that includes coverage for the cost of an insured service furnished to a resident.

An insurance contract or employee benefit plan inconsistent with the first or the second paragraph, as the case may be, that also covers other goods and services remains valid as regards those other goods and services, and the consideration provided for the contract must be adjusted accordingly unless the beneficiary of the goods and services agrees to receive equivalent benefits in exchange.

Nothing in this section prevents an insurance contract or an employee benefit plan that covers the excess cost of insured services rendered outside Québec from being entered into or established.

“Insurer” means a legal person holding a licence issued by the Autorité des marchés financiers that authorizes it to transact insurance of persons in Québec.

“Employee benefit plan” means a funded or unfunded uninsured employee benefit plan that provides coverage which may otherwise be obtained under a contract of insurance of persons.

An insurer or a person administering an employee benefit plan that contravenes the first or second paragraph is guilty of an offence and is liable to a fine of $50,000 to $100,000 and, for a subsequent offence, to a fine of $100,000 to $200,000.

Source: http://www.canlii.org/en/qc/laws/stat/rsq-c-a-28/latest/rsq-c-a-28.html

Issue(s):
The main question at hand in this case is whether Quebec has the constitutional authority to establish a single-tier health plan while discouraging a second private tier health sector through specific prohibitions and whether these prohibitions infringe a persons s. 7 right of Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms?

If so, is this deprivation of a persons s. 7 right of Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms in accordance with the principles of fundamental justice and can it be justified under s.1 of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms or under  s. 9.1 of Quebec Charter?

From the case*** cite

Conclusion/Holding:
According to the Supreme Court of Canada the appeal should be allowed. The Court decided that s.15 of the HEIA and s.11 of the HOIA are inconsistent with the Quebec Charter.