C-25, r. 14 - Rules of the Court of Appeal of Québec in Civil Matters

Full text
68. Format of factum. The format of the factum shall comply with the following rules:
(a)  Colour of cover. The colour of the cover shall vary according to the party: yellow for the appellant, green for the respondent and grey for the other parties.
(b)  Front cover. The front cover shall set out the following:
i.  the court file number assigned by the Clerk;
ii.  the court that rendered the judgment appealed from, the judicial district, the name of the judge who rendered judgment, the date of the judgment and the court file number;
iii.  in the following order, the names of the appellant, the respondent and, if applicable, the other parties; under each party’s name, that party’s status in the appeal shall be indicated in upper-case letters and the party’s status in first instance shall be indicated in lower-case letters;
iv.  the identification of the factum according to the status of the party filing it;
v.  the name of the party’s attorney.
(c)  Table of contents. The first volume of the factum shall contain a general table of contents at the front, and each subsequent volume shall contain a table of its contents.
(d)  Pagination. Page numbers shall be indicated in the upper left-hand corner of each page of the argument and at the top of each page of the schedules.
(e)  Number of pages. Except where a Judge has permitted otherwise, the argument shall not exceed 30 pages in length.
(f)  Characters and spacing. The text of the argument shall have at least one and one-half spaces between the lines, with the exception of quotations, which shall be single-spaced and indented. The characters shall be in 12-point font size and there shall be no more than 12 characters per 2.5 cm.
(g)  Numbering of paragraphs. The paragraphs of the argument shall be numbered.
(h)  Numbering of volumes. If there is more than one volume, the volume number and the sequence of pages contained therein shall be indicated on the cover and bottom edge of each volume.
Decision 2006-04-17, s. 68.