2013 QCCQ 6251, 2013 QCCQ 6251

Phillips Friedman Kotler c. Intellagent Mobile inc. 2013 QCCQ 6251 COURT OF QUEBEC «Small Claims Division» CANADA PROVINCE OF QUEBEC DISTRICT OF MONTREAL TOWN OF MONTREAL Civil Division No: 500-32-126838-111 DATE: June 27, 2013 ______________________________________________________________________ BY THE HONOURABLE DIANE QUENNEVILLE, J.C.Q. ______________________________________________________________________ PHILLIPS FRIEDMAN KOTLER Plaintiff v. INTELLAGENT MOBILE INC.

Defendant ______________________________________________________________________ JUDGMENT ______________________________________________________________________ [ 1 ] The Plaintiff, Phillips Friedman Kotler, a law firm, claims from the Defendant, Intellagent Mobile Inc., the unpaid fees for services rendered in the amount of $5,217.67. [ 2 ] The Defendant refuses to pay, alleging it was a victim of Plaintiff’s false representations, undue delay and overbilling. THE FACTS [ 3 ] The Defendant retained the services of a third party who was to develop a mobile phone application.

Before the work was completed, this third party billed the Defendant an amount of $24,000, of which $12,000 was paid by the Defendant.

The latter refuses to pay the remainder of the account, complaining that the work was not completed. [ 4 ] The Defendant retained the services of Me Angeliki Papadimitropoulos of the Plaintiff law firm, to order this third party to complete the work or provide the source code and to prevent the third party from using Defendant’s intellectual property. [ 5 ] The Defendant states that, when he discussed the matter with Me Papadimitropoulos, he mentioned that Defendant’s financial situation was precarious. She assured Defendant’s representative, Mr. Robert Goldenberg, that the fees would be minimal.

He complains that she did not indicate her hourly rate, nor did she provide an estimate of the fees. [ 6 ] Me Papadimitropoulos denies that she said the fees would be minimal and she doubts she did not mention her hourly rate of $350. [ 7 ] The services were provided between January 27, 2010 to May 3, 2010 and on June 8, 2010, an invoice was sent to the Defendant for the total amount claimed of $5,217.67, Exhibit P-1 . [ 8 ] Except for the entry of two hours made on February 3, 2010, during which Me Papadimitropoulos reviewed the documentation, the remainder of the time spent on file consisted of verbal discussions and exchanges of emails with Mr.

Goldenberg and the third party. No description is provided in the account on the purpose and subject matters of each entry. [ 9 ] Mr. Goldenberg complains that little result was accomplished for the amount billed. He did not recover the $12,000 paid, nor did he receive the completed work or the source code. THE ANALYSIS [ 10 ] Articles 3.08 and following of the Code of Ethics of Advocates, lists the many obligations an advocate has towards his client.

Namely, he must act in the client’s best interest before accepting a mandate, he must inform the client of his hourly rate and provide an estimate of the costs to be incurred. In the present matter, no estimate was provided to the Defendant and the Court doubts that Me Papadimitropoulos mentioned her hourly rate. [ 11 ] If an attorney wishes to convince the Court that the work done was to the benefit of the client and that the fees claimed are fair

and reasonable, at minimum, the description of the work must be provided. In the present matter, the entries provide no information on the purpose of the work done. [ 12 ] Ultimately, the Defendant did not have to pay the remainder of the account billed by the third party. However, this result, considering all of the circumstances, did not justify fees amounting to $5,217.67. [ 13 ] The Court estimates that an amount of $1,739.22 is adequate compensation for the work done. FOR THESE REASONS, THE COURT : GRANTS in part Plaintiff’s action; CONDEMNS the Defendant to pay to Plaintiff the sum of $1,739.22, with interest at the legal rate of 5% plus the additional indemnity provided at

Article 1619 of the Civil code of Québec , as of July 8, 2010; with costs in the amount of $159 representing the judicial stamp of the application. __________________________________ DIANE QUENNEVILLE, J.C.Q. Date of hearing: April 9, 2013