2023 QCCQ 3644, 2023 QCCQ 3644

9383-9923 Québec inc. c. Beaudry 2023 QCCQ 3644 COURT OF QUÉBEC Small Claims Division CANADA PROVINCE OF QUÉBEC DISTRICT OF GATINEAU TOWN OF GATINEAU « Civil division » N° : 550-32-702316-214 DATE : June 2, 2023 BY THE HONOURABLE STÉPHANE D. TREMBLAY, J.Q.C. 9383-9923 QUÉBEC INC. Demanderesse /défenderesse reconventionnelle c. VÉRONIQUE BEAUDRY Défenderesse / demanderesse reconventionnelle ______________________________________________________________________ JUDGEMENT ______________________________________________________________________ 1.

OVERVIEW [ 1 ] In September 2018, 9383-9923 Québec inc. (" Québec ") retained the services of notary Véronique Beaudry (" Me Beaudry ") to draft the deed of sale, receive the signature of the mortgage-secured loan and other incidental services pertaining to the acquisition of two multi-residential buildings. [ 2 ] The fee agreement, which governs the relationship between Québec and Me Beaudry, is reflected in an email dated September 7, 2018. Me Beaudry agrees to draft the deeds of sale for a flat rate of $ 1,200. Me Beaudry is very specific about the services that are included in this package.

For all other ancillary services to the transaction, the applicable hourly rate will be $250. [ 3 ] The parties do not agree on the amount of $4,010.52 invoiced for services ancillary to the transaction by Me Beaudry on an hourly rate basis. [ 4 ] According to the Québec representative, the services invoiced in addition to the flat-rate price were part of the package, or the charges are excessive, or the services have simply not been performed. Hence, she refuses to pay the invoice. [ 5 ] At the hearing, Me Beaudry explains that she kept the disputed amount in her trust account at the closing of the transaction.

This amount is currently there. [ 6 ] Thus, in it's Demand, Québec is seeking restitution of the amount withheld in Me Beaudry's trust account, while Me Beaudry is asking that she be allowed to withdraw the amount from her trust account. [ 7 ] To solve this case, the Court must decide if the incidental services invoiced at the hourly rate were part of the flat-fee package.

If not, the Court will have to assess the reasonableness of the services and fees invoiced in the circumstances. [ 8 ] For the reasons more thoroughly set out below, the Court concludes that the evidence shows that the incidental services billed by Me Beaudry are all reasonable and that they were not covered by the basic flat-fee package. Accordingly, Québec's Demand is dismissed and Me Beaudry is authorized to deduct her fees from her trust account. 2. analysIS

[ 9 ] As the fee agreement is central to this case, the Court takes the liberty of reproducing it in its entirety. On Fri. Sept 7, 2018, 6:17 PM Dear Mr Jane, Here is my formal quote for the project. I will be charging you a basic fee of 1200$ in legal fees per purchase, plus approximately 110$ for the registration and the applicable taxes.

This includes: ​ Obtaining the documents pertinent to the transaction; ​ Analyzing the documentation obtained; ​ Verification of the titles of the property for a minimal period of 30 years; ​ Verification of the charges affecting the property; ​ Verification and preparation of the adjustments of municipal and school taxes; ​ Preparation and drafting of the deed of sale; ​ Preparation of the statement of disbursements and of the repartitions; ​ One appointment with the Purchase and Seller to read, explain and sign the deed of sale; ​ Registration of the deed at the Land Registry division applicable; ​ Conservation of the original deed; ​ Verification of the registration of the deed on the Index of Immovables; ​ Preparation of certified copies of the deed for all parties; ​ Use of the intrust account, including receipts and issuing of cheques; ​ Closing of the file.

For all other services, including but not limitative, the reception of the mortgage as notary delegate, the examination of the leases and adjustments of rent, the title insurance documentation and premium if applicable, the letters to the tenants, all particular agreements contained in the offer that require administration, the preparation of any corporate documentation and additional appointments are billed at my hourly rate of 250$ / hour plus taxes.

This quote fee is limited to a reasonable amount of phone communications (between 2 and 5) namely a maximum total of 45 minutes, an appointment for the signature of the deed of 60 minutes. Furthermore, additional fees can be charged if required, per example if the file is to be closed in less than 7 working days, there is an extra of 350$. All missed appointments are billed for one hour. Other fees are possible but will be discussed prior to their billing. Feel free to contact me if you wish to discuss this quote.

Sincerely, Véronique Beaudry, notaire [ 10 ] The invoice contains 10 items, with sufficient details, to show that the work involved is accessory to the transaction and exceeds the $1,200 flat fee package, essentially related to the drafting of a deed of sale. [ 11 ] As an example, there is an item that reads as follows: " Preparation of corporate opinion ". This item is specifically targeted by the part of the mandate stipulating that the services which exceed the package will be billed at the hourly rate of $250.

[ 12 ] Confronted with the wording of the e-mail in which the fee agreement is documented, the Québec representative admits that she misunderstood the scope of this clause. Her understanding had been vitiated by a previous transaction. According to her, in this other transaction, her fees were included in Me Beaudry's lump-sum fee package. She had therefore not paid attention to this paragraph.

In any event, she feels that the fees are exaggerated. [ 13 ] The Tribunal can not reach this conclusion. [ 14 ] Me Beaudry has presented clear and convincing evidence demonstrating that each of the services for which she is seeking compensation have been carried out in a professional manner, and that the fees invoiced are reasonable.

In fact, the evidence shows that she significantly reduced her fees as she did not want to impose the burden of the lender's unusual demands on her client. [ 15 ] Furthermore, it is worth mentioning that when Québec's representative was informed of the amount of incidental fees she would be charged, she did not dispute or protest in any way. She merely informed Me Beaudry that she refused to pay the incidental fees at the closing of the transaction, at which time Me Beaudry terminated her mandate and her professional services were no longer required by Québec. 3.

Conclusion [ 16 ] The principal claim is dismissed with costs, and the cross demand is allowed with costs. FOR THESE REASONS, THE COURT: [ 17 ] DISMISSES 9383–9923 Québec inc.’s Demand; [ 18 ] GRANTS Me Véronique Beaudry’s Cross Demand; [ 19 ] CONDEMNS 9383-9923 Québec inc. to pay to Me Véronique Beaudry the amount of $4,010.52 , with interest at the legal rate and the additional indemnity provided for in

article 1619 of the Civil Code of Québec since December 2, 2018, and Authorise S Me Véronique Beaudry to withdraw this sum from her trust account; [ 20 ] WITH LEGAL COSTS in favour of Véronique Beaudry, namely the court fees of $106 related to the Contestation and the court fees of $106 related to the Cross Demand __________________________________ STÉPHANE D. TREMBLAY, J.Q.C. Date of hearing : June 2, 2023