2017 QCCQ 371, 2017 QCCQ 371

Liu c. 9181-5712 Québec inc. 2017 QCCQ 371 COURT OF QUEBEC Small Claims Division CANADA PROVINCE OF QUEBEC DISTRICT OF MONTREAL Civil Division No: 500-32-148700-158 DATE: February 1, 2017 ______________________________________________________________________ BY THE HONOURABLE ELIANA MARENGO, J.C.Q. ______________________________________________________________________ YUE LIU Plaintiff v. 9181-5712 QUÉBEC INC. et ZHAO HUI FENG et GROUPE SUTTON-CLODEM INC.

Defendants ______________________________________________________________________ JUDGMENT ______________________________________________________________________ [ 1 ] On November 20, 2011, a bilateral promise to purchase and sell residential unit No. 103 in the Monaco Condominium Project, in LaSalle, intervened between plaintiff and defendant 9181-5712 Quebec Inc. (“the Company”) (exhibit P-1). The purchase price was $227,246.20. Plaintiff paid a deposit totalling $31,500.00. [ 2 ] In December, 2012, the parties bilaterally agreed to annul said promise (letter, exhibit P-4).

Although the Company undertook to reimburse the totality of the above deposit, it only reimbursed half thereof. Plaintiff is therefore suing the Company for $15,000.00. She is also suing the Company’s sale representative Zhao Hui Feng (“Feng”), as well as real estate broker Groupe Sutton-Clodem Inc. (“Clodem”). [ 3 ] The Company failed to appear or file a plea. The Court is therefore proceeding by default insofar as it is concerned.

[ 4 ] The Company is indeed liable for the amount claimed, as it failed to honour its contractual obligations vis-à-vis plaintiff. [ 5 ] However, plaintiff has no valid recourse against Feng. According to the preponderance of evidence, in her dealings with plaintiff, Feng acted for and on behalf of the Company and not in a personal capacity [1] (“Working Agreement”, exhibit D-3). Furthermore, plaintiff failed to prove that Feng acted in bad faith or dishonestly in the execution of her duties (arts. 2803 and 2804 Civil Code of Quebec ). There is, in fact, no evidence of extra contractual wrongdoing on her part.

The recourse against Feng must therefore be denied. [ 6 ] On the other hand, Feng’s cross-demand is unsubstantiated and unfounded. [ 7 ] As regards Clodem, according to the preponderance of evidence, it was never involved in this project, and Feng did not act as an agent of Clodem when dealing with plaintiff. The recourse against Clodem must therefore also be denied.

WHEREFORE THE COURT HEREBY: GRANTS plaintiff's motion against 9181-5712 Quebec Inc.; SENTENCES defendant 9181-5712 Quebec Inc. to pay plaintiff the sum of $15,000.00, plus interest at the legal annual rate of 5% and the additional indemnity provided for in

article 1619 of the Civil Code of Quebec , as of May 4, 2015 and legal costs in the amount of $200.00; DISMISSES plaintiff’s application against Zhao Hui Feng, without costs; DISMISSES Zhao Hui Feng’s cross-demand; DISMISSES plaintiff’s application against Groupe Sutton-Clodem Inc. without costs. __________________________________ ELIANA MARENGO, J.C.Q. Date of hearing: January 17, 2017