2014 QCCA 1318, 2014 QCCA 1318

Denton c. 4536631 Canada inc. (Gestion Réno-Dépôt inc.) 2014 QCCA 1318 COURT OF APPEAL CANADA PROVINCE OF QUEBEC REGISTRY OF MONTREAL No: 500-09-024291-148 ( 500-17-063296-118 ) MINUTES OF THE HEARING DATE: July 7, 2014 CORAM: THE HONOURABLE NICHOLAS KASIRER, J.A. MARIE ST-PIERRE , J.A. MANON SAVARD, J.A. APPELLANT COUNSEL MICHAEL DENTON Mtre Normand D. Pépin RESPONDENT COUNSEL 4536631 CANADA INC. (Gestion Réno-Dépôt inc.) Mtre François Barré BÉLANGER SAUVÉ, SENCRL

Motion to dismiss the appeal from a judgment rendered on January 30, 2014 by the Honourable Madam Justice Danièle Mayrand of the Superior Court, District of Montreal (Articles 501 (4.1) &

(5) C.C.P..) Clerk : Nadia Samy Courtroom : Pierre-Basile-Mignault HEARING 9:34 Commencement of the hearing. 9:34 Submissions by Mtre Barré. 9:38 Submissions by Mtre Pépin. 9:53 Recess. 9:57 Resumption. 9:57 Judgment – see page 3. 10:00 End of the hearing.

Clerk BY THE COURT JUDGMENT [ 1 ] Michael Denton has appealed a judgment of the Superior Court, District of Montreal (the Honourable Danièle Mayrand), rendered on January 30, 2014, dismissing his claim in damages against 4536631 Canada inc. (Gestion Réno-Dépôt). [ 2 ] The trial judge found the appellant lacking in credibility and she rejected his account of the altercation with the employees of the respondent. Contrary to the testimony given by the appellant at trial, she concluded that none of the employees of the respondent had assaulted or pushed the appellant but rather that he had instigated matters himself.

Moreover, the judge held that the appellant failed to prove the damages he claimed, on the basis of evidence presented before her. [ 3 ] In his inscription in appeal, the appellant submits that the judge erred in her evaluation of the credibility of the various witness at trial. In support of this argument, he asks the Court to review the account he gave of the events at trial and overrule the judge’s findings on credibility. [ 4 ] The appellant seeks to retry arguments that failed him in first instance; as a general rule, in the absence of a palpable and

overriding error, that exercise is not the proper basis for an appeal. The judge noted that the outcome of the case turned on the credibility of witnesses given that the appellant’s account was diametrically opposed to that of the respondent’s witnesses. His inscription in appeal reveals no argument upon which the Court could reasonably rely in order to disturb the conclusions of fact of the trial judge, including her findings as to credibility. As such, the appeal presents no reasonable prospect of success and, pursuant to the subparagraph 4.1 of the first paragraph of

article 501 C.C.P ., it should be dismissed summarily. [ 5 ] In the circumstances, it is not necessary to decide whether or not there has been an irregularity in the formation of the appeal. FOR THE AFOREMENTIONED REASONS , the Court: [ 6 ] GRANTS the motion to dismiss the appeal, with costs; [ 7 ] DISMISSES the appeal, with costs. NICHOLAS KASIRER, J.A. MARIE ST-PIERRE, J.A. MANON SAVARD, J.A.