Ramsden c. Arnault Thibault Cléroux 2013 QCCA 457 COURT OF APPEAL CANADA PROVINCE OF QUEBEC REGISTRY OF MONTREAL No: 500-09-023219-124 ( 500-22-190487-127 ) MINUTES OF THE HEARING DATE: March 11, 2013 CORAM: THE HONOURABLE FRANCE THIBAULT, J.A. MARIE-FRANCE BICH, J.A. DOMINIQUE BÉLANGER, J.A. PETITIONER DANIELA RAMSDEN In person RESPONDENT ATTORNEYS ARNAULT THIBAULT CLÉROUX Mtre Michèle Tétreault Mtre Stéphane Cléroux ARNAULT THIBAULT CLÉROUX ATTORNEY

Motion for special leave to appeal from a judgment rendered on October 10, 2012 by the Honourable Armando Aznar of the Court of Quebec, District of Montreal. Clerk: Robert Osadchuck Courtroom: Pierre-Basile-Mignault HEARING 10 h 23 Beginning of the hearing. 10 h 23 Submission by Daniela Ramsden. 10 h 37 Recess. 10 h 48 Resumption of the hearing. 10 h 48 By the Court: judgment – see next page. 10 h 49 End of the hearing. Robert Osadchuck Clerk BY THE COURT JUDGMENT [ 1 ] The petitioner alleges that she was travelling overseas at the time the notice prescribed by art. 473 C.C.P. was sent and that she actually became aware of the judgment on October 30, 2012 only, upon her return.

[ 2 ] At best, the petitioner should have filed her inscription in appeal on December 1, 2012.

She did not, and her motion for special leave to appeal, dated December 10, 2012 but filed on December 28, 2012, does not explain why it was in fact impossible for her to act within 30 days of the date when she became aware of the judgment. “Not having time because of work” does not qualify as a circumstance which makes it impossible to act within the meaning of art. 523 C.C.P. [ 3 ] Furthermore, the petitioner fails to demonstrate that her appeal has any reasonable chance of success or that the matter ought to be submitted to the Court of Appeal. [1] [ 4 ] FOR THESE REASONS , the motion for special leave to appeal is DISMISSED , with costs.