Quebec language laws – uncertainty around insurance “grey zone”

Bill 96 gained royal assent in June, updating Quebec’s Charter on the French Language.

“The purpose of this Act is to affirm that the only official language of Québec is French,” the Act, entitled An Act respecting French, the official and common language of Québec, reads.

“It also affirms that French is the common language of the Québec nation.”

The new legislation, building on 1977’s Bill 101 (another name for the charter), will bring in new penalties, including fines, for rulebreakers and opens businesses with 25 or more staff up to action if they do not abide by the legislation.

For firms headquartered outside of Quebec and doing business there, the new law is likely to prove “a little bit shocking”, said Eric Azran, partner at Stikeman Elliott.

Under new rules, which are being phased in up to 2025, employees in Quebec are entitled to interact with their employer in French. This means that all official communications and employment contracts will need to be in French, and training materials and other resources will need to be available in the language.

It would also be unlawful except in certain circumstances for a company to mandate that new hires or job movers must speak a second language, for example English.

“You may have a situation where you have a francophone person in Quebec, speaking to a manager who’s an anglophone in Ontario,” Azran said.

 “Operationally speaking, a lot of people just don’t know where this will land.”

What do new Quebec language rules means for insurance policies?

There are two components to the new legislation that insurance businesses will be particularly mindful of, according to Azran.

One area that has prompted questions from insurance businesses is around insurance policy contracts.

The Act sets out that contracts must be drawn up in French, but there are some exceptions, including for insurance policies.

An insurance policy that has “no French equivalent in Quebec” and either comes from outside Quebec or does not see “widespread” use in province can be written in another language, according to the Act.

However, this remains a “major grey zone”, according to Azran.

“For now, a lot of us really presume that this is a very, very, very bespoke type of insurance contract, but there’s no guidance,” Azran said.

Less complex insurance contracts that do not have an exemption will have to be supplied in French, though if an insured then requests a version in another language that can then be permitted.

“In principle, these contracts have to be provided to the insured in French, so the insured has to receive a French copy – and when the insured receives the French copy, he or she can then tell the insurer, you know what, I’d rather have an English copy,” Azran said.

“The English copy then becomes legal, but it has to follow a French delivery and it has to be specifically requested by the insured.”

Businesses need to be sensitive and understanding of the cultural significance of the changes, Azran said.

“It’s not just executing this as an obligation – this is something that people take to heart and really care for,” he said.

“As a company doing business, you want to show respect for that, and you want your employees, number one, and your consumers or your clients, number two, to see that you are embarking with this sensitivity – to me, this is as sensitive as diversity, or LGBT, or as any other issue where in today’s world you can’t operate or function without showing sensitivity to those issues.”

What will the cost of Bill 96 be for businesses?

Not everyone has been convinced by the language law changes, with some fearing unintended consequences from any exodus of talent or business.

Under Canadian Federation of Independent Business estimates, a roughly 50-strong employee company could face costs of between $9.5 million and $23.5 million, CityNews Montreal has reported.

A string of business departures followed the charter’s introduction in 1977, the New York Times reported the following year. In 2022, some have concerns that the stricter rules could put overseas and out of province businesses off Quebec.

In a June letter to Quebec’s Premier François Legault, 36 tech CEOs said that the Bill threatened “to do enormous damage to the province’s economy” and called for a pause to its rollout in the face of labour shortages.

“If the best and brightest innovators, technologists, and business builders gravitate to Toronto, Edmonton, Vancouver, and Halifax instead of Montreal and Quebec City, it will do permanent damage to our province’s economic prosperity,” they said.

“This is already happening, but it’s not too late to change course.”

“I think that Bill 96 is a balanced bill and it’s important to have a balanced bill,” Legault reportedly said in response at an August press conference.

“It’s important to protect French and French will always be vulnerable.”

Some businesses have hit hurdles since retail laws came in on June 1. A Denver, US based accessories manufacturer, Otter Box, pushed pause on shipments to Quebec under the advice of its legal counsel in response to the Bill’s June passage, CBC reported.

“On the one hand, you want to incentivize foreign corporations to come in and invest and plant their flag here; on the other end, you’re putting conditions to them coming in,” Azran told Insurance Business.

“That’s a shock from the business’ perspective; you’re asking these corporations to come in and to invest more money into their operation to do business in Quebec versus Ontario, or anywhere else in Canada, and that’s the battleground.”

Controversy elsewhere

Outside of business, the Act has drawn discrimination allegations. It has faced opposition from representatives of the province’s indigenous community, students, English language rights campaigners, and parent groups.

Protesters took to downtown Montreal’s streets in May – before the Bill passed – claiming it would have ramifications for access to justice, healthcare, and education, CBC reported.

Two sections of the Act have been stayed pending a Quebec Superior Court judgement after a group expressed access to justice concerns. The rules, regarding court proceeding documentation translation requirements, had been due to come into force in September.