Quebec Court of Appeal hears case on granting tenants the right to have pets

The Quebec Court of Appeal is deliberating after hearing arguments on Wednesday on whether the right to have pets should be protected by law.

Last March, housing tribunal Judge Suzanne Guèvremont ruled that lease clauses banning pets violate Charter rights to liberty and privacy.

Guèvremont also argued in her decision that the evolution of animal protection laws, which recognize the bond between humans and their pets, required case law to evolve as well. 

Amilis, the company that owns the building in which the complainant lives, appealed the decision.

The case was brought to court after a tenant, identified as M Desjardins, had taken over a lease that included a clause banning pets. However, it had been established at the time that Desjardins' pets — a dog and a cat — were not causing any problems and that other pets in the building were tolerated.

But a new company, Amilis, purchased the building and enforced the no-pet clause.

The company's lawyer, Damarys Pineda, argued that the judge had gone beyond her authority by acting as a substitute for the legislature, which is responsible for no-pet clauses.

The lawyer also argued that the no-pet clause is intended to protect the well-being of all tenants in a building and that it would be unreasonable to force landlords to allow pets in their buildings if they do not want them.

While landlord-tenant agreements are possible, she argued that any tenant can now contest a no-pet clause by invoking the Charter. 

Desjardin's lawyer, Kimmyanne Brown, stressed that Guèvremont's decision only applied to Desjardins. 

Court documents indicate Desjardins needed pets for animal-assisted therapy due to anxiety, depression and post-traumatic stress. She added that the court cannot rule on issues not raised in the initial case, such as the protection of others who may be allergic or afraid of animals.

The SPCA also intervened in the case. 

Marie-Claude St-Amant, the lawyer representing the SPCA, argued that the legislature now allows pets to be considered members of the family and that as a result Desjardins's rights had been violated.

She also said she asked the office of the Attorney General of Quebec if it wished to intervene in the case, which it declined. St-Amant argued the response is proof that Guèvremont did not overstep her authority.

After the hearing, SPCA spokesperson Julie Gaillard said she expected a series of appeals in this case, which could eventually reach the Supreme Court. 

This report by The Canadian Press was first published Oct. 14, 2026.

By Pierre Saint-Arnaud | Copyright 2026, The Canadian Press. All rights reserved.