2013 QCCQ 3084, 2013 QCCQ 3084

Unique Home Solutions Inc. c. Kaplo 2013 QCCQ 3084 COURT OF QUEBEC "Small Claims Division" CANADA PROVINCE OF QUEBEC DISTRICT OF MONTREAL Civil Division N° : 500-32-127084-111 DATE : April 10, 2013 ______________________________________________________________________ BY THE HONOURABLE ELIANA MARENGO, J.C.Q. ______________________________________________________________________ UNIQUE HOME SOLUTIONS INC. Plaintiff v.

JOSEPH KAPLO and NADINE HAGE Defendants ______________________________________________________________________ JUDGMENT ______________________________________________________________________ [ 1 ] A contract for home-staging services, for a 3 month term, intervened between the parties, on October 30, 2010 (exhibit P-1). [ 2 ] However, defendants decided to terminate the contract, on November 3, 2010. Plaintiff had already begun staging the home. [ 3 ] Plaintiff is suing defendants for the full price of the contract, although plaintiff did not complete her mandate. [ 4 ] In virtue of

article 2125 of the Civil Code of Quebec , defendants had the right to unilaterally resiliate the contract, even though the provision of service was already in progress. [ 5 ] Furthermore,

section 7 of contract P-1 stated that it could be terminated by either party upon 10 days written or verbal notice to the other party. [ 6 ] Pursuant to

article 33 of the Consumer Protection Act (R.S.Q., c. P-40.1), the consumer is bound to fulfil his obligation only from the moment he possesses a duplicate of the contract. [ 7 ] Plaintiff cannot charge defendants for any services rendered before the contract was signed (article 33 of the Act ). [ 8 ] In accordance with

article 2129 C.C.Q., defendants are bound to pay plaintiff, in proportion to the agreed price, the actual costs and expenses and the value of the work performed before the notice of resiliation. [ 9 ] WHEREAS defendants cannot be held liable for the value of the work performed before the contract was signed; [ 10 ] WHEREAS, according to

section 2 of the contract, the term of the contract was 3 months; [ 11 ] WHEREAS plaintiff performed work on November 2, 2010, before receiving the notice of resiliation; [ 12 ] WHEREAS plaintiff's mock invoice (exhibit P-3) is grossly exaggerated; [ 13 ] WHEREAS the Court, in its discretion and based on the foregoing, assesses the value of the work performed at $200.00; WHEREFORE THE COURT HEREBY: GRANTS plaintiff's application, in part; SENTENCES defendants jointly and severally to pay plaintiff the sum of $200.00, plus interest at the annual rate of 5%, and the additional indemnity provided for by

article 1619 C.C.Q., as of November 29, 2010, and the judicial fees of $118.00. __________________________________ ELIANA MARENGO, J.C.Q.

Date of hearing : March 25, 2013