Alvarado v. Dart Container Corp. of California, S232607

Retroactivity: Public policy: Administration of justice:

(…) At oral argument, defendant’s counsel urged that if we rule for plaintiff, our holding should be given prospective application only. We recently noted in Williams & Fickett v. County of Fresno (2017) 2 Cal.5th 1258, 1282, that fairness and public policy sometimes weigh against the general rule that judicial decisions apply retroactively. Prospective application might be appropriate, for example, “when a judicial decision changes a settled rule on which the parties below have relied.” (Ibid.) In this regard, the reasonableness of the parties’ reliance and the effect retroactivity will have on the administration of justice are key considerations. (Ibid.) (…) In short, defendant cannot claim reasonable reliance on settled law.

(Cal. S.C., March 5, 2018, Alvarado v. Dart Container Corp. of California, S232607)

La Cour n'acceptera de rendre un dispositif avec effet dans le futur plutôt qu'avec effet rétroactif que dans des circonstances restrictives. Le plus souvent, ces circonstances seront données si le Jugement consiste en un revirement de jurisprudence, mais pour autant que les parties se soient raisonnablement fiées à l'état de la jurisprudence jusqu'audit Jugement. L'intérêt public et l'administration de la justice sont également considérés.