Employers with cross-border employees or remote-working employees should take note of the Quebec Superior Court’s recent decision in Cicale v. Swiss International Air Lines Ltd., 2025 QCCS 4421. This case confirms that an employee will likely be entitled to the employment protections of the Civil Code of Quebec where they physically perform their work from the province of Quebec.
Background
In Cicale, the employee relocated from New York to Montreal in 2012 to assume the position of Country Manager for Canada, the most senior role within Swiss International Air Lines’ (“Swiss”) Canadian operations.
After concerns arose regarding a double housing allowance received by the employee, Swiss attempted to repatriate her to New York. She refused the new role and alleged constructive dismissal.
In the litigation, a key question regarding whether New York or Quebec law would apply to the employee’s employment.
The Legal Framework: Article 3118 C.C.Q. and the “Usual Place of Work”
Under article 3118 of the Civil Code of Quebec, parties cannot choose a law that deprives an employee of the mandatory protections provided by the State where the employee habitually carries out their work.
In this case, Swiss argued that the employee’s ties to the United States – including her participation in U.S. benefit plans, certain administrative responsibilities, and her family-related travel – justified the application of New York law.
The Court rejected this argument. Instead, it concluded that these factors reflected administrative or personal considerations rather than the true nature of the employment relationship. Although certain administrative ties remained in the United States, the employee’s employment was clearly rooted in Quebec:
- She worked in Montreal every week and held a Canadian work permit indicating Montreal as the location of her employment.
- She rented an apartment in Montreal.
- She paid both federal and provincial taxes in Canada.
- Her duties were performed exclusively in Quebec, and her previous U.S. supervisory functions were reassigned after her relocation.
According to the Court, these factors demonstrated a real and stable integration into the Quebec workplace. Moreover, the employee’s assignment to Canada was not temporary; Swiss’s decision to post her position in Montreal after her departure confirmed its permanent nature.
The Court’s Conclusion: Quebec Law Applies
The Court held that the employee’s habitually carried out her work in Quebec and was therefore entitled to Quebec’s employment protections. Such a finding is heavily significant, as employees governed by the Civil Code of Quebec have a statutorily protected right to reasonable notice of termination (akin to common law notice).
Implications for Employers
Employers should note that administrative ties – such as payroll location, benefit plans, or tax treatment – do not determine the applicable law in Quebec. Rather, for the application of the Civil Code of Quebec, including its notable provisions on reasonable notice, what matters is where the employee habitually performs their work.
Accordingly, employers with employees who habitually carry out their work in Quebec (including remotely from home) should be aware that their employees may be entitled to the employment protections provided by the Civil Code of Québec, regardless of where the employer is based or how the employment is administered.
If your organization needs help assessing the risks with cross-border employees in Quebec, please contact Sophie Kassel 613-410-6115 and François Russo 343-997-3042.
More generally, Emond Harnden’s Quebec Law Team can be contacted for any Quebec employment or labour law questions your organization may have.