Peracomo Inc v TELUS Communications Co, 2014 SCC 29 is a decision of the Supreme Court of Canada concerning the law of marine insurance, which also has international impact.

It cost them almost $1,000,000 to repair it.In 1999, QuébecTel (subsequently acquired by Telus), in conjunction with Hydro-Québec, laid two fibre-optic cables across the Saint Lawrence River:[2] In June 2006, Réal Vallée, a local fisherman engaged in snow crab and whelk fishing[a] aboard the catamaran Realice, had strung a series of cages on the river bottom, secured at both ends by small anchors attached to buoys.

[b] Remote monitoring controls operated by Telus indicated that the Sunoque I parted about 8.9 kilometres (4.8 nautical miles) off Baie-Comeau.

Telus, Hydro-Québec, and Bell Canada (which had a right of use of the cable), shared the cost of repair in accordance with a pre-existing contract among them.

When Vallée learned of the repairs that were being undertaken, he consulted a lawyer, notified his underwriters (who promptly denied coverage), and made a voluntary statement to the police.

[18] In his ruling, Cromwell J held that: While agreeing with Cromwell J that the Convention applied so as to limit liability, Wagner J believed that the relevant provision of the Marine Insurance Act must be read harmoniously with the Convention's provisions, and would have therefore allowed the appeal in its entirety, with costs.

[27] As Peracomo was concerned with the interpretation of the Convention, and could therefore have a wide-reaching impact on commercial maritime law around the world, the case attracted international attention.