Declared Dead in Quebec, Alive in Iran: the Brossard Disappearance Exposed by His Own Insurer

Publié le 10 avril 2026 à 12:01
Persons Law · Estates · Life Insurance · Supreme Court  Justice-Quebec.ca | April 10, 2026

A man leaves Brossard in 2008, saying he's heading to Toronto on business. He never comes back. Eight years later, his wife has him declared dead. But the life insurer — the one who would have to pay — discovers he is very much alive. In Iran. The Supreme Court of Canada rules today: a declaration of death can be annulled even when the "dead" man refuses to show up.

Justice-Quebec.ca  ·  By Maxime Gagné  ·  Case Analysis  ·  Riddle v. ivari, 2026 SCC 9  ·  April 10, 2026
2006
Hooshang Imanpoorsaid takes out a life insurance policy with ivari. He lives in Brossard, Quebec, with his wife Deborah Riddle.
Feb. 17, 2008
He leaves home saying he has business in Toronto. He never arrives. Police confirm he was never there. He is never seen by his family again.
2016
After 7 years of complete absence, Ms. Riddle obtains a declaratory judgment of death. The insurer objects — suspecting voluntary flight — but the law prevails.
2018–2019
Insurer ivari files to annul the judgment. Evidence submitted: Iranian identity cards, passports, 16 flights in and out of Iran, social assistance registration.
2019–2025
Superior Court annuls the death judgment. Court of Appeal confirms. Ms. Riddle appeals to the Supreme Court of Canada.
Apr. 10, 2026
The Supreme Court of Canada unanimously dismisses the appeal. The declaratory judgment of death remains annulled. The insurer does not have to pay.

What happened — a disappearance that looks like a flight

In February 2008, Hooshang Imanpoorsaid — originally from Iran, living in Brossard with his wife — left home saying he had a business trip to Toronto. He never showed up there. His family never saw him again. The police investigation went nowhere.

In 2016, after seven full years of silence — the threshold set by the Civil Code of Quebec under article 92 — his wife Deborah Riddle obtained a declaratory judgment of death. Life insurer ivari had opposed it from the start, arguing that the circumstances pointed to a voluntary disappearance rather than a death. The court granted it anyway: the law does not allow blocking a declaration of death simply because the circumstances look suspicious, once seven years have passed.

But ivari did not let it go. The company hired investigators and obtained documents from Iranian authorities: in 2015, a man matching the name and description of Mr. Imanpoorsaid was issued a national identity card in person by Iran's state census agency. Iranian civil registry records showed no death. Two passports had been issued since 2008. Between 2008 and 2017, this person flew in and out of Iran at least 16 times — including three times after the death judgment was issued. In December 2018, he registered for social assistance in Iran.

"A declaratory judgment of death presumes the death of the absentee — it does not establish it. This judgment is a legal fiction and must always yield to proof that the missing person is currently alive."
— Chief Justice Wagner · Riddle v. ivari, 2026 SCC 9, para. 60
✦ ✦ ✦

The two questions decided by the Supreme Court

Question 1

Can a death judgment be annulled without notifying the "dead" person?

The insurer had failed to serve the annulment application on Mr. Imanpoorsaid himself — something that could normally have invalidated the entire proceeding. The Supreme Court found that this procedural defect does not automatically defeat the application: since Mr. Imanpoorsaid suffered no real prejudice — no argument he could have made would have changed the outcome — the failure to serve is not sufficient to dismiss the case. The rule is contextual, not mechanical.

Question 2

What does "return" mean — and what standard of proof applies?

Ms. Riddle argued that the "return" of a person declared dead required a physical return to Quebec, and that the evidence had to meet a near-certainty standard. The Court rejected both arguments. The word "return" in articles 97 and following of the Civil Code simply means the reappearance of the person anywhere in the world — not necessarily here. And the standard of proof remains the balance of probabilities, as in any civil proceeding: it is enough that current existence be more probable than not.

What the Civil Code of Quebec says — in plain language

Article 92 C.C.Q. allows a person to be declared dead after seven years of absence without news. It is a legal fiction — the law presumes death to allow life to move on: estates, matrimonial regimes, insurance policies.

But article 98 C.C.Q. explicitly provides that a third party can apply to have that judgment annulled if the person is still alive. It is not permanent. It is not set in stone. The fiction yields to reality the moment you can prove it.

The evidence that convinced the courts

The trial judge had before her an accumulation of official Iranian documents. Taken individually, each piece might have been insufficient. Together, they form a coherent and convincing picture that a person identified as Mr. Imanpoorsaid is alive in Iran.

Evidence retained by the courts

In 2015 — a national identity card issued in person by Iran's state census agency to a man named Hooshang Imanpoorsaid.

In 2018 — Iranian civil registry records show this person as currently alive, with no record of death.

Since 2008 — two Iranian passports issued to this person, the first just months after he left Quebec.

Between 2008 and 2017 — at least 16 flights in and out of Iran, including three after the declaratory judgment of death was issued.

In December 2018 — registration for social assistance benefits in Iran.

The Supreme Court confirms that the trial judge made no error in concluding, on the basis of this evidence, that Mr. Imanpoorsaid was more probably alive than dead. The insurer therefore does not have to pay out the policy.

✦ ✦ ✦

What this decision changes — and clarifies for everyone

The facts of this case are exceptional, but the Supreme Court's ruling clarifies rules that could affect many people: anyone with a missing loved one, a pending estate, a life insurance policy, or a complex family situation involving someone who has been absent for years.

Principle 1

A declaratory judgment of death is not final

It can be annulled. All that is required is proof, on a balance of probabilities, that the person is still alive. The person does not need to appear before the court — official foreign documents are sufficient if the overall evidence is convincing.

Principle 2

"Return" does not mean returning to Quebec

The Supreme Court resolves an important ambiguity in the Civil Code: being alive somewhere in the world — even in Iran, even without ever having contacted family — constitutes a legal "return." There is no requirement to come back here physically.

Principle 3

A voluntary disappearance does not protect you from your creditors

The Court is clear: someone who fakes their disappearance to escape their obligations cannot hide behind a declaratory judgment of death. If creditors can prove the person is alive, the judgment can be annulled — and their obligations resume.

What this means if you are personally affected

If a loved one has been declared dead by court order and you have reason to believe they are still alive, a remedy exists under article 98 of the Civil Code of Quebec. Proof can be indirect — official foreign documents, photographs, testimony — as long as it is sufficiently consistent and convincing.

Conversely, if you have received life insurance proceeds or inherited under a declaratory judgment of death, be aware that the judgment can be challenged by a third party. If the person is found to be alive, the effects of the judgment cease — and the financial consequences can be significant.

"The legislature preferred fiction to uncertainty... but it never intended for fiction to prevail over reality."

— Chief Justice Wagner · 2026 SCC 9, para. 86
Analysis — Justice-Quebec.ca — By Maxime Gagné — April 2026

Hooshang Imanpoorsaid disappeared from Brossard eighteen years ago. His family still does not know why. His wife will not receive the life insurance. And he — if he reads the news from Tehran — now knows that the Supreme Court of Canada has confirmed what the Iranian documents already showed: in the eyes of the law, he is back.

You can run from your life. You cannot run from your legal identity.

Sources: Riddle v. ivari, 2026 SCC 9 (CanLII) · Civil Code of Quebec, art. 84, 90, 92, 97, 98, 101, 2804 and 2847 · Code of Civil Procedure of Quebec, art. 140 · Threlfall v. Carleton University, 2019 SCC 50 · F.H. v. McDougall, 2008 SCC 53

This article is an editorial analysis based on a public decision. Justice-Quebec.ca is an independent citizen platform. It does not constitute legal advice. The author is not a lawyer.
52208542 Docx
Word – 106,9 KB 0 téléchargement

Ajouter un commentaire

Commentaires

Il n'y a pas encore de commentaire.