Marika Douville

Lawyer, Partner

Expertise

Insurance Law
Professional Liability

Language

English, French

Telephone

514 393-7421

Email

mdouville@rsslex.com

vCard

Download vCard

Office

Montréal

LinkedIn

 

Marika Douville is a partner in our Insurance Law Group and the head of our Professional Liability department. She focuses her practice on defense matters in professional and disciplinary liability, representing various insurers, professional liability funds and institutions. Additionally, she practices civil liability law in cases involving bodily injury, life insurance and disability insurance.

Member of the Bar since 2005, Marika also holds a Master’s Degree in health law from Université de Sherbrooke and a Certificate in Ethics from Université de Montréal. This multidisciplinary training enriches her practice, particularly in complex cases where legal, regulatory and human issues intersect.
Over the years, she has been involved in a wide range of litigation, including class actions, relating to the civil and professional liability of various professionals in the legal, healthcare, and business sectors. She actively represents notaries, lawyers, accountants, pharmacists, hospitals, dentists, audiologists, chiropractors, naturopaths, optometrists and podiatrists.

Recognized for her thoroughness and strategic judgment, Marika has sharp expertise in legal analysis, courtroom representation and negotiation. She stands out for her human approach and her ability to provide concrete solutions that meet the highest expectations.

Representative files and mandates

  • McKenzie v. Xytex Corporation (Xytex Cryo International), 2025 QCCQ 1093 (CanLII): The court dismissed an application seeking authorization for an expert opinion regarding a newly identified genetic defect, ruling that the applicant was foreclosed and had not demonstrated the existence of a new fact. See also McKenzie v. Xytex Corporation (Xytex Cryo International), 2021 QCCA 380 (CanLII): An application for leave to appeal a decision denying an extension of the deadline for filing expert reports was dismissed. The applicant’s lack of diligence and transparency, combined with the absence of exceptional circumstances, was decisive. Leave to appeal was denied in the interest of proportionality and justice.
  • 9071-0179 Québec inc. v. Gestion Annick Gagnon inc., 2025 QCCS 804 (CanLII): The court dismissed a damages claim against a notary. In the absence of a specific mandate, the notary is not required to conduct due diligence on the buyer.
  • Racine v. Savoie, 2025: 200-09-700171-256: Request for leave to appeal denied. The plaintiffs lacked legal representation. See also Racine v. Savoie, 2025 : 600-17-000687-187: The claim brought against the notary was dismissed and declared abusive as of November 23, 2019. The court ordered full reimbursement of the fees paid by the notary’s insurer from that date onward, the payment of moral damages, compensation for lost time, and reimbursement of an increased professional liability insurance premium.
  • Banque Laurentienne du Canada v. Vincent, 2025 QCCQ 1012 (CanLII): The court held mortgage debtors liable for the unpaid loan balance despite a banking error in amounts communicated to the notary. The Bank never issued a full discharge. Professional fault by the notary was not demonstrated.
  • Fortier v. Sun, 2024 QCCQ 1192 (CanLII): The court found fraud and latent defects (mouse infestation and air infiltration) in a real estate transaction, justifying a price reduction, damages, and reimbursement of expert fees to the buyers represented by RSS.
  • 9266-7433 Québec inc. v. Municipalité de La Pêche, 2021 QCCS 2022 (CanLII): The court rejected a motion to annul a notarized deed brought against a notary.
  • Presmy v. Branco, 2021 QCCS 2922 (CanLII): In a civil liability action, the court rejected the claims of a plaintiff involved in a fraudulent scheme. No defendant was at fault, and the plaintiff cannot base claims on their own misconduct. See also Presmy v. Lemyre, 2021 QCCA 1610 (CanLII): The court dismissed an appeal against defendants accused of real estate fraud and notarial fault, concluding that there was a lack of evidence, credibility, and decisive errors.
  • Morika Capital inc. v. Deslauriers, 2020 QCCQ 2890 (CanLII): The court dismissed a liability claim against a notary, concluding no extracontractual fault or breach of duty of advice was proven. It also held that no claim existed regarding an alleged side letter providing a guaranteed profit. See also Morika Capital inc. v. Deslauriers, 2018 QCCQ 4062 (CanLII): The court dismissed the parties’ objections and authorized forced intervention and third-party claims by two-thirds, concluding their presence was necessary to fully resolve the main dispute and avoid contradictory judgments.
  • Gestion George Kyritsis inc. v. Balabanian, 2020 QCCS 1806 (CanLII): The court held that a declaration of falsity is not necessary to challenge a notarized deed when the contested facts are outside the notary’s duties, simplifying and clarifying judicial procedure.
  • M.F. v. Gravel, 2019 QCCS 2521 (CanLII): The court dismissed a claim alleging the fault of a lawyer for failing to transmit an agreement to the court or an insurer, concluding there were no clear instructions or obligations in the absence of finalized terms. Financial loss resulted from the plaintiff’s choices and lack of follow-up.
  • Maïo v. Goulet, 2019 QCCS 4043 (CanLII): The court dismissed a civil liability action against a lawyer, finding the claim abusive and manifestly unfounded. The lawyer, acting as a witness, benefitted from qualified immunity for her statements.
  • Vandal v. Bédard-St-Amant, 2019 CanLII 89608 (QC CDNQ): The Council rejected an analyst’s subpoena, finding that the information in dispute was protected by litigation privilege, ensuring confidentiality of insurer investigations and defense communications.
  • M.P. v. F.D., 2016 QCCS 880 (CanLII): The court confirmed the presumption of truthfulness of statements recorded in a notarized will absent clear and convincing evidence of falsity. Requests to register falsity and reopen proceedings by the plaintiffs were rejected for failing to meet the legal criteria for acceptance.
  • Family Law — 152897, 2015 QCCS 5421 (CanLII): In a divorce proceeding, the court rejected a motion to annul a prenuptial contract, concluding that the evidence presented by the defendant was insufficient to overcome the presumption of authenticity provided by the Quebec Civil Code. Judgment confirmed on appeal — Family Law — 162686, 2016 QCCA 1783 (CanLII).
  • Picard (Estate of), 2015 QCCS 6502 (CanLII): The court rejected the challenge to a will in the absence of evidence of coercion or undue influence and refused access to the testator’s medical file, citing the importance of professional secrecy and the lack of substantial interest by the plaintiffs.
  • Cotnoir v. 9089-7224 Québec inc. (Auberge Cartier), 2015 QCCS 1348 (CanLII): The court dismissed motions to annul notarized deeds relating to condominium sales, concluding that the defendants failed to satisfy the burden of proving a discrepancy between the deed and the parties’ actual intentions. Priority was given to authentic documents duly explained by a notary.

Associations

  • Montreal Association of Insurance Women
  • L’Association de la relève en assurance du Québec (LARAQ)

Bulletins

Who Must Be Represented by a Lawyer? Beware of Sanctions!

August 6, 2025

In civil matters, self-represented litigants are increasingly common before the Quebec courts. This possibility is expressly provided for in article 23 of the Code of Civil Procedure (“C.C.P.”), which allows any person to be self-represented. However, this right is subject to several exceptions outlined in article 87 C.C.P., which provides mandatory legal representation in certain […]

The insurer’s obligation to defend and indemnify: A subject revisited, yet still current

October 22, 2019

In Développement les Terrasses de l’Île inc. c. Intact, compagnie d’assurances, 2019 QCCA 1440, the Court of Appeal of Quebec examined claims for the cost of repairing construction defects and the cost of repairing the damage caused by the defects, and had to decide the extent of the insurer’s obligation to provide a defence to […]

What are the obligations of a pre-purchase inspector?

June 15, 2018

While for some the pre-purchase inspection is essential when purchasing a home or building, others feel it is of little use considering the various limitations to the inspector’s mandate. Marika Douville explains basic notions on inspections, then discusses them in light of the decision of the Superior Court in 9125-5216 Québec inc. c. Sogevem Associés […]

Publications and Conferences

  • « Quelle est l’étendue de l’obligation d’un inspecteur préachat? », (2018) 54–3 MAIW Newsletter 15
  • Contributes to the Quebec Bar’s continuing education publications
  • Guest lecturer for the insurance and forensic medicine microprogram offered by Université de Montréal’s school of medicine

Community Involvement

  • Regularly conducts information sessions for advocacy groups supporting vulnerable populations
  • Participated in the TV series Erreurs médicales broadcast by Canal Vie
  • Took part in various press conferences concerning the rights of health and social services users

Education

Master of Health Laws and Policies (LL.M.)

Université de Sherbrooke

2011

Bachelor of Civil Law (B.C.L.)

Université du Québec à Montréal

2004

Certificate in Ethics

Université de Montréal

2001

Call to Bar

Quebec

2005