MODES PRIVÉS DE PRÉVENTION ET DE RÈGLEMENT DES DIFFÉRENDS ET L’ÉTAT

LA NOTION D’INTÉRÊT PUBLIC

Abstract

Rules that enable conflict resolution for the state remain largely unknown and understudied. Section 75 of Quebec’s Code of Civil Procedure (CCP) constrains the state’s use of Dispute Prevention and Resolution (DPR) modes by including three criteria: government regulations on the subject, public interest and the applicable legal standards. This article analyzes concerns tied to one limit, public interest, and follows a preceding article that studied applicable legal standards and government regulations on the subject.

In practice, the notion embodies two distinct goals in the state’s conflict resolution efforts. On the one hand, it curtails some  initiatives outside the courts, as it encompasses various functions related to public authority which the state cannot circumvent in resolving its dispute such as the management of public money, the administration of justice, and the enforcement of laws. On the other hand, public interest also suggests the prioritization of accessibility, efficiency and expediency of justice, goals frequently favoured by the use of DPR modes, and which argue for a state-led implementation of these modes in certain areas of law.

Using this concept, the article distinguishes between the various areas in which the state is involved in determining when the use of DPR modes should be avoided, when they should be used as a complement to the courts, and when they should be prioritized.