## Facts

- Hélène Desputeaux, an illustrator, created the graphic character “Caillou,” which was used in children’s books written by Christine L’Heureux and published by Les Éditions Chouette (1987) inc.
- From 1989 to 1995, the parties entered into multiple agreements governing publication and exploitation of the Caillou illustrations.
- A 1993 licence contract described Desputeaux and L’Heureux as co-authors of works containing Caillou, assigned certain reproduction rights to the publisher, included waivers relating to moral rights, and authorized sublicensing by the publisher.
- The 1993 contract contained an arbitration clause; the contractual relationship also fell within a Quebec statute directing that disputes over such artist–promoter contracts be submitted to arbitration.
- In 1996, the parties disputed (i) copyright ownership/authorship in Caillou and (ii) the scope and duration of the publisher’s reproduction rights.
- The matter was referred to arbitration, where the arbitrator interpreted the contractual framework, determined that Caillou was a work of joint authorship, and concluded the publisher held the relevant reproduction rights and was authorized to use Caillou broadly across media.
- Desputeaux sought annulment of the award in Quebec Superior Court; the court refused and upheld the award.
- Desputeaux appealed to the Quebec Court of Appeal.

## Issues

1. Whether disputes concerning copyright authorship/ownership in the Caillou character could be submitted to arbitration, given limits on arbitrability under Quebec law and the jurisdictional scheme of federal copyright legislation.
2. Whether the arbitrator exceeded the scope of the arbitral mandate by ruling on copyright “paternity” (authorship) and ownership and by giving determinations with effects beyond the parties.
3. Whether the award was invalid as contrary to public order or mandatory statutory provisions governing the parties’ contractual relationship.

## Decision

- The Quebec Court of Appeal allowed the appeal and annulled the arbitral award.
- The court held that the arbitrator lacked jurisdiction to decide core questions of copyright authorship/ownership and therefore exceeded the arbitral mandate.
- The court treated copyright “paternity” as bearing a public-order character that placed it outside arbitration.
- The court read the federal provision assigning jurisdiction over “proceedings relating to” copyright as excluding arbitral determination of copyright questions.
- As a result, the award was set aside notwithstanding the parties’ arbitration clause and the statutory referral-to-arbitration framework.

## Legal Principles

- Arbitration cannot determine matters characterized as non-arbitrable under Quebec law, including questions framed as involving public order or akin to personal status/personality rights.
- Where a tribunal decides a non-arbitrable question, it acts without jurisdiction or beyond its mandate, and the resulting award is vulnerable to annulment.
- A jurisdictional provision allocating certain copyright proceedings to specified courts may be interpreted as limiting arbitral competence over copyright disputes.
- The possibility that a finding on authorship/ownership could be asserted against non-parties (erga omnes) was treated as incompatible with private arbitration, which ordinarily binds only the parties.

## Conclusion

The Quebec Court of Appeal annulled an arbitration award resolving a contractual dispute over the Caillou character, concluding that determinations of copyright authorship and ownership were not properly arbitrable and that the arbitrator exceeded the mandate by deciding issues the court viewed as public-order in nature and reserved to courts under federal copyright jurisdiction rules.


Desputeaux v. Éditions Chouette (1987) Inc., [2001] R.J.Q. 945 (Que. C.A. 2001)