Overview
The civil case alleging sexual assault and rape against Just for Laughs founder Gilbert Rozon concluded in Montreal after more than 60 court days spread over about 10 months. The nine plaintiffs left the Palais de Justice de Montréal describing themselves as moved, happy, and satisfied with how the proceedings unfolded. The long, emotional journey of coming forward and seeking accountability was a central thread as the courtroom closed for this phase of the case.
Voices from the Plaintiffs
One of the plaintiffs, actress Patricia Tulasne, said she was moved and proud to be part of a group that has been called the “Courageous.” She acknowledged the substantial time the case consumed and emphasized the importance of speaking out, despite the personal toll of having intimate details aired publicly. “We are very moved, very happy that it’s over,” she remarked, adding that she hopes the experience will help push justice and reform.
Others who spoke as the proceedings closed—Danie Frenette, Anne-Marie Charette, and Martine Roy—shared a similar resolve, expressing no regrets about pursuing the case and stressing the necessity of victims coming forward to challenge violence and systemic barriers. Their comments underscored a common aim: to catalyze broader changes in how society addresses sexual violence and its aftermath.
Legal Team and Court Perspective
The plaintiffs’ lead counsel, Bruce Johnston, acknowledged the difficult path his clients chose but said they appeared relieved that the matter had reached its formal conclusion. He described the process as marked by empathy from the court and a careful examination of evidence, noting the Superior Court’s significant resources devoted to the case given its public relevance.
Rozon’s defense, represented by Mélanie Morin and Pascal-Alexandre Pelletier, expressed satisfaction with how the trial unfolded. They emphasized that whatever the outcome, the proceedings would contribute to the ongoing development of law in Quebec around these complex issues and stressed that the matter is now in the hands of the judiciary.
Judge Chantal Tremblay, who presided since December, thanked both sides for maintaining decorum and breathed life into the idea that even in tense moments, the court could proceed with serenity. She noted the trial’s length and complexity and expressed appreciation for those who agreed to make private lives public in the service of a broader truth.
What Happens Next
The judge now has six months to render a decision. Her task will be to review the voluminous evidence and determine which version of events is more probable, assess the credibility of the nine plaintiffs, and resolve any legal questions about prescription and the presence of myths or stereotypes that could shape the case. In addition to liability, she will decide on the damages claim, including punitive and compensatory components, with the plaintiffs seeking CAD 14 million for acts alleged to have occurred between 1980 and 2004.
Context and Implications
The proceedings highlight enduring questions about how sexual violence cases are handled in civil courts, informed by the interplay between public scrutiny and the victims’ privacy. For the plaintiffs, the decision represents not only personal accountability but a broader statement about the willingness of institutions to acknowledge harm by prominent figures in the entertainment industry. For supporters of Rozon, the case foregrounds legal considerations that may shape how similar disputes are argued in Quebec courts in the years ahead.
Timeline and Stakes
With the six-month window set for the ruling, both sides await a decision that could carry wide-reaching implications for civil remedies in assault cases. The outcome will define not only potential damages but also set precedents for how victims’ testimonies are weighed against a defendant’s denials in Quebec’s civil justice system.
