2020 QCCQ 7923, 2020 QCCQ 7923

Colby Monet c. Khela 2020 QCCQ 7923 COURT OF QUEBEC «Small Claims Division» CANADA PROVINCE OF QUEBEC DISTRICT OF MONTREAL TOWN OF MONTREAL "Civil Division" No: 500-32-157732-183 DATE: November 24th, 2020 ______________________________________________________________________ BY THE HONOURABLE DIANE QUENNEVILLE, J.C.Q. ______________________________________________________________________ COLBY MONET LLP Plaintiff v.

SINGH SANTOKH KHELA Defendant ______________________________________________________________________ JUDGMENT ______________________________________________________________________ [ 1 ] The Plaintiff, a law firm, claims from the Defendant the services rendered between June and November 2016 in a tax matter, which remain unpaid. [ 2 ] The Defendant argues that no work was done in his file and that he paid for the services.

THE CONTEXT [ 3 ] The Defendant complains that this matter was referred to Steven Roch, a partner with the Plaintiff and that for a long period of time, no work was done following the assessment by Revenue Québec. [ 4 ] In addition, he states that the accounts for professional services rendered were paid, at least $1,000 was paid to the Plaintiff. [ 5 ] In fact, if Steven Roch did any work in the file, it was fairly limited as he did not charge any fees to the Defendant. From the documentation on file [1] , Mr.

Roch’s name appears on two memos from Felipe Morales dated August 15 and October 28, 2016. [ 6 ] As appears from the detailed invoices, only Mr. Morales provided the services to the Defendant and only his time was charged to the file. [ 7 ] It would also be surprising that the file was dormant for many years, as stated by the Defendant, as the first account for professional services rendered is dated August 26, 2016 [2] and the sum of $1,000 previously held in trust is deducted. Two other accounts were sent dated November 15, 2016 and December 31, 2016. [ 8 ] As of December 2016, Mr.

Morales left the Plaintiff’s law firm to join another firm and the Defendant continued to retain his services at this new firm. It is therefore surprising that the Defendant was not satisfied with the services provided by Mr. Morales. [ 9 ] On September 29, 2017, a Demand Letter [3] was sent by the Plaintiff to the Defendant claiming the amount owed plus interest. The amount of the fees is $2,976.69.

However, no agreement was signed by the Defendant that he would pay interest at a higher rate than the legal rate. [ 10 ] The Defendant did not provide any valid reason for refusing to pay the professional services owed to the Plaintiff. [ 11 ] With respect to the Defendant’s cross-claim, no evidence was provided that the Plaintiff acted negligently, which argument is somewhat surprising, as stated above, he continued to retain the services of Mr. Morales.

FOR THESE REASONS, THE COURT : GRANTS in part Plaintiff’s action; CONDEMNS the Defendant to pay to Plaintiff the sum of $2,976.69 with interest, at the legal rate plus the additional indemnity provided at

Article 1619 of the Civil Code of Québec , with costs in the amount of $171 representing the judicial stamp of the claim; DISMISSES the Defendant’s cross-claim, without cost.

__________________________________ DIANE QUENNEVILLE, J.C.Q . Date of hearing: November 19, 2020