2013 QCCQ 6371, 2013 QCCQ 6371

Ahmad c. Codina 2013 QCCQ 6371 COURT OF QUEBEC Small Claims Division CANADA PROVINCE OF QUEBEC DISTRICT OF MONTREAL TOWN OF MONTREAL Civil Division No: 500-32-133591-125 DATE: June 25, 2013 ______________________________________________________________________ BY THE HONOURABLE SUZANNE HANDMAN, J.C.Q. ______________________________________________________________________ JAMIL AHMAD […] , Laval (QC) […] Plaintiff v.

ANGELA CODINA […] , Montréal (QC) […] -and- CODINA INTERNATIONAL GROUP INC. doing business as CODINA INTERNATIONAL CONSULTANTS (same address) Defendants ______________________________________________________________________ JUDGMENT ______________________________________________________________________ [ 1 ] Jamil Ahmad is claiming $6,500 from Defendants Angela Codina and Codina International Group inc. doing business under the name of Codina International Consultants (“Codina”), alleging their failure to respect their contract. Defendants deny the claim. The evidence: [ 2 ] In January 2011, Mr.

Ahmad concluded a contract with Codina [1] to find a job in Canada for his son living in Pakistan. The initial payment was $2,500; another $2,500 was to be paid when an employer was found. [ 3 ] Mr. Ahmad concluded a second contract with Codina in May 2011 to process the immigration application for his son. The cost of this contract was $4,000 with an initial payment of $1,500. [ 4 ] According to Mr. Ahmad, Codina failed to call him. He went to Codina’s office and although Mrs.

Codina said she had found an employer, she refused to provide him with any evidence of this claim. [ 5 ] Since he never received a copy of the employment letter or additional information about the job placement in Canada, Mr. Ahmad demanded the reimbursement of the $6,500 he paid. Defendants claim they never received his demand letter. [ 6 ] According to Mrs. Codina, her company found an employer for Mr. Ahmad’s son. She provided a letter she claimed she gave to Mr. Ahmad personally, a fact he denies. She maintains Mr.

Ahmad did not cooperate since he failed to provide her with documents regarding his son’s education, employment record and references.

[ 7 ] Then she testified that Mr. Ahmad told her in the summer 2011 his son no longer wished to come to Canada. Mr. Ahmad denies this fact and contends he submitted all the required documentation but never received any information. [ 8 ] Codina believes there may have been an error in communication. It offered to continue the process if Mr. Ahmad agreed to do so but he no longer had confidence in Defendants. Analysis: [ 9 ] Codina, in its December 2012 written contestation of the action, states that the process is ongoing and is following its normal course. However, at the hearing, Mrs.

Codina gave an entirely different version, first claiming a lack of cooperation on the part of Mr. Ahmad and then claiming his son no longer wanted to pursue his application. [ 10 ] Mrs. Codina maintains Mr. Ahmad never provided the requisite documentation. Mr. Ahmad not only denied her allegation but also provided the Court with a copy of his son’s employment and education records, which he says he submitted to Codina. The Court finds Codina’s claim improbable, particularly since Mr. Ahmad sought employment for his son in Canada. [ 11 ] Mrs. Codina stated she had never received Mr. Ahmad’s demand letter.

However, it was transmitted by bailiff to her company’s address and was received by a person who identified herself as an employee of her company. [ 12 ] In light of the foregoing facts, the Court finds Mr. Ahmad’s version more credible and is of the view that the funds and necessary documents were given to Codina but no further information was provided to Mr. Ahmad. [ 13 ] Mr. Ahmad seeks a reimbursement of the money he paid.

According to the contract, Codina has “3 months in which to source the prospective employer after which period the initial payment of $2,500 will be fully refundable at the discretion of the Client, should a placement not be secured” . [ 14 ] Mrs. Codina testified that Codina was entitled to keep the funds received since it had found a prospective employer. Mr. Ahmad testified he had never seen the letter Codina produced in evidence. [ 15 ] Even if the letter had been given to him, which the Court founds unlikely, a prospective employer was not found within the 3 month time limit, as stipulated in the contract.

In such a case, Mr. Ahmad is entitled to be reimbursed his initial $2,500. [ 16 ] The second amount of $2,500 was to be paid upon confirmation of employment. This amount should also be reimbursed since the prospective employer was not sourced within the specified delay. As well, the sum of $1,500 Mr. Ahmad paid for LMO (labour market opinion) is refundable since it was related to the employment offer. [ 17 ] While Mr. Ahmad has the right to obtain a refund from Codina, Mrs. Codina is not personally responsible. There is no lien de droit between Mrs. Codina and Mr.

Ahmad. [ 18 ] By inadvertence, the Court did not hear evidence on Codina’s request to retract the judgment rendered against it on October 31, 2012. However, since the Court heard the case on the merits, the parties had an opportunity to fully present their evidence. Given the conclusions reached, the judgment already rendered is maintained.

FOR THESE REASONS, THE COURT: MAINTAINS the judgment rendered on October 31, 2012 and; ORDERS Codina International Group inc. doing business under the name of Codina International Consultants to pay Zahoor Ahmad $6,500 plus interest at the legal rate and the additional indemnity foreseen by

section 1619 of the Civil code of Québec since March 5, 2012 and judicial fees of $163; DISMISSES the action against Angela Codina, without costs.

__________________________________ SUZANNE HANDMAN, J.C.Q. Dates of hearing: February 12 and June 3, 2013