The end of a long civil case
After more than 60 days of hearings spread over nearly 10 months, the civil trial accusing Juste pour rire founder Gilbert Rozon of sexual assault and rape came to a close on Monday. The nine plaintiffs left the Montreal courthouse describing themselves as emotional, happy, and satisfied with the process and its outcome. The lengthy proceedings, which brought intimate details into the public eye, marked a defining moment in a broader conversation about accountability and survivor advocacy in Quebec.
Voices from the courtroom
One of the nine plaintiffs, an actress identified in reports as Patricia Tulasne, said she felt moved by the end of the trial and proud to be part of a group she described as courageous. She acknowledged the difficulty of having private lives laid bare on the public stage, but emphasized the importance of pursuing such cases to push justice forward. Other plaintiffs, including Danie Frenette, Anne‑Marie Charette, and Martine Roy, echoed a similar resolve: there is no turning back on speaking out against violence, and denouncing what happened remains essential for change.
The plaintiffs’ lead counsel, Me Bruce Johnston, told reporters that his clients were very happy the trial has concluded. He noted they felt heard with empathy and kindness, and praised the Superior Court for dedicating substantial resources to a matter of broad social significance. He affirmed that the evidence presented supports the case and that the matter now rests with the judge.
Defense perspective and courtroom tone
In a parallel sentiment, Rozon’s defense team, led by Me Mélanie Morin and Me Pascal-Alexandre Pelletier, expressed satisfaction with the course of the proceedings. They argued that regardless of the outcome, the process has the potential to advance Quebec law on issues related to sexual violence and civil liability. The tone from the defense underscored a belief that the trial’s conduct was constructive and that the legal system has progressed in how it handles such complex claims.
The judge’s task and the road ahead
Judge Chantal Tremblay, who has presided over the case since December, thanked both sides for maintaining a calm and respectful atmosphere during what she described as a long, demanding, and complex trial. She acknowledged that the parties agreed to have their private lives exposed and stressed the importance of balancing public interest with individual privacy. The judge now has six months to render a ruling, a period she plans to use to revisit the extensive body of evidence and assess the credibility and reliability of each account.
Beyond deciding who is more credible, Tremblay will also determine the viability of articles related to the end of the prescription period for bringing such claims and address broader questions about myths and stereotypes surrounding sexual violence. The plaintiffs are seeking approximately 14 million in damages for alleged assaults and rapes spanning from 1980 to 2004, including potential punitive and compensatory damages. The judge’s decision will shape not only the fate of this high-profile case but also the legal landscape for similar claims in Quebec moving forward.
What this means for Quebec and for survivors
As the court moves closer to a verdict, advocates say the case reinforces the message that survivors deserve a robust avenue to seek accountability. While the outcome remains pending, the public nature of the proceedings has already contributed to a broader dialogue about justice, trust in institutions, and how society treats those who come forward with allegations of violence. The ruling, when issued, will be carefully parsed by both supporters and critics as a signal of how civil courts in Quebec navigate sensitive charges that intersect with culture, media, and personal trauma.
