2018 QCCQ 7643, 2018 QCCQ 7643

Hugues Paull c. Gabereau 2018 QCCQ 7643 COURT OF QUEBEC « Small Claims Court » CANADA PROVINCE OF QUÉBEC DISTRICT OF BEDFORD LOCALITY OF COWANSVILLE « Civil Chamber » N° : 455-32-700210-171 DATE : October 22, 2018 ______________________________________________________________________ PRESIDING : THE HONOURABLE MARTIN TÉTREAULT J.Q.C. ______________________________________________________________________ Jacqueline HUGUES PAULL Plaintiff v.

Michel GABEREAU Defendant ______________________________________________________________________ JUDGMENT ______________________________________________________________________ [ 1 ] The plaintiff is suing the defendant for the loss of income that she would have incurred for the four months it took to repair the premises that she was renting.

The defendant denies any liability because the plaintiff’s claim would have been covered by his insurance company. [ 2 ] According to the Civil Code of Quebec , a person seeking to assert a right shall prove, on the balance of probabilities, the facts on which his claim is based. [1] [ 3 ] According to

section 1611 C.C.Q., the damages due to a creditor shall compensate for the loss sustained and the profit on which he has been deprived.

In case of material damages, the court must take into account the replacement or repair costs of the goods affected. [2] The loss of future profit must be certain and assessable. [3] [ 4 ] Since the defendant does not contest the existence of a lease nor the fact that water damage caused the closing of the plaintiff’s business for four months, the sole question remaining refers to the damages. [ 5 ] At the hearing, the plaintiff testified that she would have lost $4,003.91 in profit because of the flood.

She filed a spreadsheet that she prepared showing the average sales from February to June 2014 and 2015 to which she deducted the rent. [4] She claims 75% of the total obtained, because she evaluated her costs of 25% of this total. [ 6 ] The plaintiff could not provide any document to support the spreadsheet that she filed. [ 7 ] Moreover, the plaintiff admitted having received more than $9,000 from the defendant’s insurer for the goods damaged by water. For the goods that could not be repaired, the insurer paid the full selling price.

For the goods that could be repaired, 33% of the selling price was given. [ 8 ] The amount of $9,000 paid is almost the same as the sales for the same period in 2014. [ 9 ] In view of the above considerations, the Court comes to the conclusion that the plaintiff has not made proof of her damages. Therefore, her claim must be dismissed. FOR THESE REASONS, THE COURT : [ 10 ] DISMISSES Plaintiff’s Demand ; [ 11 ] THE WHOLE WITH COSTS, against Plaintiff. __________________________________ MARTIN TÉTREAULT J.Q.C.