2015 QCCQ 9565, 2015 QCCQ 9565

Boudreau c.

LA Leasing (8415854 Canada inc.) 2015 QCCQ 9565 COURT OF QUEBEC Small Claims Division CANADA PROVINCE OF QUEBEC DISTRICT OF montreal TOWN OF montreal Civil Division No: 500-32-142302-142 DATE: September 14, 2015 ______________________________________________________________________ presided BY THE HONOURABLE david l. cameron, j.c.q. ______________________________________________________________________ jacqueline boudreau […] Pierrefonds (Québec) […] Plaintiff v. l.a. leasing (8415854 canada inc.) 8665, Décarie Montréal (Québec) H4P 2T9 Defendant ______________________________________________________________________ Reasons for JUDGMENT rendered from the bench ______________________________________________________________________ [ 1 ] The Court is seized of a motion by the Defendant to postpone the hearing on its motion in revocation of judgment. [ 2 ] The Court received, on September 10, 2015, by fax, a letter from Murray Rubin of L.A.

Leasing, stating that he would not be present at today’s hearing because of the religious holidays of the 14 th and the 15 th of September. While this would normally constitute a valid reason to request a postponement, no postponement was actually requested. Mr.

Rubin was advised by the court officer who received the fax that, if the opposing party did not consent to the postponement implicitly requested, the company would have to send a representative to ask for the postponement at today’s hearing. [ 3 ] This morning, a lawyer, Mtre Gilles Doré, came before the Court and was advised by the undersigned that he could not represent L.A. Leasing because, in Small Claims files, there are no parties represented by lawyers except in certain circumstances which are not relevant here. Then, Mtre Doré asked, as a friend of the Court, if he could inform L.A.

Leasing that the Court intended to proceed. After a brief suspension, he first was able to secure the presence of Mr. Goodeson who no longer works for the company and who informed the Court that when he set the date after the previous postponement he was not aware that the 14 of September was a Jewish holiday. The Court suspended again at Mtre Doré’s request. [ 4 ] Upon resuming the hearing after the lunch break, a person representing L.A. Leasing, Mr.

Peter Zaloum, informed the Court that he had no knowledge of the case prior to today and did not know whether the grounds for revocation of judgment could be substantiated. [ 5 ] While the Court is very reluctant to proceed in a case where someone has not attended because of a religious conviction, the overriding factor in this case is that the date was requested by L.A. Leasing who was, therefore, aware of it and could have, as early as the month of May, requested a change to the date.

When the notice of hearing was delivered, probably more than a month ago, nothing was done and a step was taken only on the 10 th of September to initiate the communication that was taken to be a request for a postponement. [ 6 ] The prejudice resulting from the postponement is therefore caused by L.A.

Leasing itself for not properly administrating its affairs with respect to the Court. [ 7 ] The request for a postponement because of a religious observance cannot be considered valid in this case because it was not made at the point in time where it could have been raised for the first time, nor for the second time. [ 8 ] As well, given the grounds that are raised both in the motion for revocation of judgment and also in the defence, the Court has a strong conviction that the grounds of contestation are not serious and that the reasons for requesting the revocation are not substantiated.

The whole exercise appears to have been dilatory. [ 9 ] for these reasons, the court : [ 10 ] Dismisses the request for postponement made by the Defendant;

[ 11 ] Dismisses the request for revocation of judgment for want of proof, having declared the Defendant’s proof closed; [ 12 ] Confirms the judgment rendered in the file by default January 27 th , 2015 which granted the Plaintiffs complaint. __________________________________ david l. cameron, j.c.q. Date of hearing: September 14, 2015