2014 QCCQ 11472, 2014 QCCQ 11472

Unofficial English Translation Dupuis c. Misson 2014 QCCQ 11472 COURT OF QUEBEC Civil Division CANADA PROVINCE OF QUEBEC DISTRICT OF MINGAN LOCALITY OF SEPT-ÎLES No.: 650-22-003102-122 DATE: February 26, 2015 ______________________________________________________________________ PRESIDING: THE HONOURABLE NATHALIE AUBRY, J.C.Q. (JA0809) ______________________________________________________________________ MAUDE DUPUIS Plaintiff v.

BRUNO MISSON Defendant ______________________________________________________________________ CORRECTED JUDGMENT ______________________________________________________________________ [ 1 ] On August 13, 2012, the plaintiff Maude Dupuis (Dupuis) [1] brought an action against the defendant Bruno Misson (Misson).

She claims a sum of $10,000.00 for damage to her reputation, honour, and dignity, a sum of $9,000 as punitive damages, and a sum of $5,000 for material damages and for loss of wages and time. [ 2 ] For his part, the defendant disputes the claim and asks the Court to dismiss the plaintiff's amended motion to institute proceedings, with costs, and order her to pay him the extrajudicial fees incurred to file his defence. [ 3 ] This case is essentially one of defamatory libel on the Facebook social network and by other means, following a romantic relationship that lasted close to three years.

SUMMARY OF THE FACTS SUBMITTED [ 4 ] The parties were involved in a romantic relationship from the summer of 2009 until January 11, 2012, when the plaintiff decided to end the relationship. [ 5 ] Since there was a major housing crisis in Sept-Iles at the time, the plaintiff allowed the defendant to continue sharing her home until he found a suitable place to live and moved there. [ 6 ] On the evening of January 14, 2012, the plaintiff learned that the defendant had written things about her on Facebook.

Since Misson had blocked her access to his personal page, Dupuis used the account of one of her sons to access the page. She read the following conversation on his wall: [2] [ translation ] "January 13 at 12:22 p.m. Bruno Misson Since yesterday, there are more than 10 persons in my family who are upset about my tragedy, my devastation! Should I now say 'Thank you, life'? I honestly don't think so!!! It seems SO CLEAR to me that when you want "life" to be good and redeeming, you just have to have the will and believe in it and, above all, not give up at the slightest obstacle. (Here I say CHRIST!!!!) ...

... ... ... ... ... ... ... January 13 at 8:53 p.m. Bruno Misson To my cousin: You know, when you're in the process of losing the woman of your dreams, for no good reason in my opinion, it's a hard pill to swallow :-( January 14 at 5:35 a.m. Bruno Misson Correction, not 'in the process of losing', but in fact 'LOST'! My daughter Marie-Josée Misson was so right, that woman didn't deserve me, it was a one-way relationship, where I gave everything and practically received only crumbs. Am I a boy toy? loll ... ... January 14 at 3:49 p.m.

Bruno Misson Thanks for the words of encouragement, but it really is a hard pill to swallow, and even though I realize there is another "her" somewhere who will better suit me (let's say, who won't exploit me), my heart is broken into a million pieces! ... ...." [3] [ 7 ] The conversations continue, and we see that on January 15, Misson updated his status on his Facebook page: [ translation ] "January 15 at 7:54 a.m. Bruno Misson lolll Don't worry, my adored daughter, I poured my little heart out this morning and I copied you (as a witness). The book is now definitely closed.

All that remains is the ashes of this sad story. ... ... ... January 15 at 11:15 p.m. Bruno Misson This evening life is practically back to normal. I'm in my new home, alone, but as they say, better to be alone than in bad company :-) Thank you to my parents, children and son-in-law for helping me in every way during the past 2 days! Now I can look for a woman who will deserve all the unconditional love I have to give! ... ... ...." [4] [ 8 ] On January 17, 2012, Misson wrote as follows: [ translation ] "January 17 at 10:23 p.m. Bruno Misson Oh!

How the cayenne is frustrated loll Incredible how a person's true nature comes out in a separation :-) She recorded me, threatened me, forbade me access to her yard, called me a liar, etc. Goddamn, frustration goes a long way :-/ January 17 at 10:24 p.m.

Bruno Misson SHE DIDN'T DESERVE ME, CHRIST!!! Period! She's an egocentric person, nothing less!!! Me, myself and I!!!" [5] [ 9 ] It is clear from this excerpt of January 17 that Misson is referring to Dupuis, since the term "cayenne" designates inhabitants of Havre-St-Pierre, the plaintiff's village of origin. [ 10 ] On January 24, 2012, Misson wrote again on his personal page that his ex-spouse should ask for his forgiveness: [ translation ] "... January 24 at 3:55 p.m.

Bruno Misson It's my ex who should ask for my forgiveness *hahahaha ...." [6] [ 11 ] Subsequently, when updating his Facebook status, Misson mentioned how happy he was that a certain Sophie was back in his life again. He compared his new relationship with the one he had with Dupuis. [7] [ 12 ] At the same time as he was commenting on his relationship with his new conquest, Misson was trying to win back Dupuis and resume their life together. [ 13 ] In addition, Misson wrote a letter to Carole Lapierre, one of Dupuis's best friends, telling her about Misson's state of health.

The plaintiff had refrained from discussing this personal subject with anyone other than the defendant, her spouse at the time. [ 14 ] On January 24, 2012, Misson went so far as to send an email to the Côte-Nord Alzheimer's Society, Dupuis's employer at the time, stating or suggesting that she was a fraudster. [8] [ 15 ] On April 4, 2012, the defendant communicated via Facebook with Ms. Maude Métivier, the new spouse of the father of the plaintiff's children.

Seeking to destroy the relationship between the plaintiff and Métivier, he told her that Dupuis is a vicious and manipulative woman. [9] [ 16 ] On April 23, 2012, Dupuis sent a formal notice to Misson, enjoining him to stop the rumours about her and her activities. [10] After receiving this formal notice, Misson sent a personal letter to Carole Lapierre, retracting some of his remarks, saying that they were provoked by his frustration at the time. [11] [ 17 ] Mission sent the same retraction letter to the plaintiff's employer at the time. [12] [ 18 ] Following all these events, the plaintiff says she was very upset and unable to return to work.

In addition, she could not find a new job for a considerable period of time, as she found it difficult to go to job interviews.

In fact, she says she broke into tears in the middle of one interview. [ 19 ] Dupuis also states that because of these events, she was unable to walk for two whole days, suffering from a severe bout of fibromyalgia. [ 20 ] Furthermore, the plaintiff says that on several occasions, she was questioned about the rumours concerning her, rumours to the effect that she had defrauded the non-profit organization of which she was the director when her relationship with the defendant was ending. [ 21 ] Dupuis also points out that she was turned down by a theatre group whose senior manager was a " Facebook friend" of the defendant. [ 22 ] At the hearing, the plaintiff called witnesses. [ 23 ] Ms.

Léna Simard testified that Dupuis seemed to have lost her self-confidence following the comments made by Misson on Facebook . [ 24 ] Ms. Carole Lapierre confirmed that she had received a letter from Misson revealing information of which she had been unaware concerning her friend. She also testified to the effect that some volunteers had reported that Dupuis had bled the coffers of the Côte-Nord Alzheimer's Society, which Misson had alluded to in an email sent to the plaintiff's employer. [ 25 ] In defence, Misson testified.

He corroborated most of the events related by Dupuis but said that when he mentioned his "ex" on Facebook , he could have been referring to other former spouses with whom he had had long-term relationships. [ 26 ] In addition, Misson stated that Dupuis had tried to contact one of his friends who had clicked on Like after reading a disparaging remark on Facebook . [13] [ 27 ] The defendant said as well that he had retracted his statements by means of a letter sent to Dupuis's former employer. [14] In his retraction letter, he stated that he had done things out of anger and frustration. [ 28 ] As for the comments on Facebook , Misson defended himself by saying that everyone makes these kinds of comments and remarks.

THE LAW [ 29 ] What the Courts commonly call defamatory libel falls under

article 1457 of the Civil Code of Québec , i.e., the general civil liability provision, which reads as follows: Art. 1457 Every person has a duty to abide by the rules of conduct incumbent on him, according to the circumstances, usage or law, so as not to cause injury to another. Where he is endowed with reason and fails in this duty, he is liable for any injury he causes to another by such fault and is bound to make reparation for the injury, whether it be bodily, moral or material in nature. He is also bound, in certain cases, to make reparation for injury caused to another by the act or fault of another person or by the act of things in his custody. [ 30 ]

Section 4 of the Quebec Charter of Human Rights and Freedoms states that "every person has a right to the safeguard of his dignity, honour and reputation". [ 31 ] The Court also refers to the observations in Société Radio-Canada v. Radio Sept-Iles Inc .: [ translation ] "For libel to be defamatory, it must cause someone to lose the respect and consideration of those in his or her circle.

It must arouse unpleasant and unfavourable feelings towards him or her and be an unfair attack on his or her reputation prompted by hatred or contempt". [15] [ 32 ] The standard for determining defamation is assessed from the viewpoint of an ordinary person ( Prud'homme v. Prud'homme ) and states that even if the evidence must be focused on the perception of others, plaintiff must still prove that they suffered harm personally. [16] [ 33 ] The plaintiff filed two judgments on defamation through the Facebook social network. [ 34 ] In 9080-5128 Québec Inc. v.

Équestre Ogilvy Inc. , [17] expressing dissatisfaction with the repairs done by a garage on one’s Facebook page resulted in an order to pay total damages of $10,000.00. [ 35 ] In Laynick Carpentier v.

Jimmy Tremblay , [18] the defendant was ordered to pay to the plaintiff an amount of $10,000.00 after making comments on Facebook which were deemed defamatory. [ 36 ] In the present case, it is difficult to quantify the monetary loss suffered by the plaintiff because she cannot indicate the amount she lost in wages. [ 37 ] Furthermore, all the comments posted on Facebook personally devastated the plaintiff, depriving her of self-confidence during interview periods to find a new job.

In addition, Misson knew that the plaintiff's employment contract with the Côte-Nord Alzheimer's Society was coming to an end. [ 38 ] However, the Court does not have the plaintiff's record of earnings for 2012 in order to compare them with her previous earnings to determine the difference in terms of lost wages. [ 39 ] Nevertheless, in the present case, the Court believes that defamatory libel was in fact perpetrated on the Facebook social network and in communications with some of the plaintiff's friends, relatives, and employers.

The Court is of the opinion that this was done by a scorned lover for the sole purpose of hurting his former spouse. [ 40 ] Considering that the case law seems consistent on the question of damages for having used the Facebook social network to disparage a person, the Court fixes these damages at approximately $1,000.00. As for the sending of derogatory letters to third parties, it fixes the damages at $1,500.00. [ 41 ] With respect to punitive damages, the plaintiff is entitled to them, but considering the retraction letters written by Misson, the Court fixes these damages at $2,500.00.

FOR THESE REASONS, THE COURT : [ 42 ] GRANTS the motion in part ; [ 43 ] REJECTS the defence; [ 44 ] ORDERS the defendant to pay to the plaintiff the sum of five thousand dollars ($5,000.00) with interest at the legal rate as well as the additional indemnity, as of April 23, 2012, the date of the plaintiff's formal notice; [ 45 ] THE WHOLE with costs.

__________________________________ NATHALIE AUBRY, J.C.Q. Maude Dupuis Plaintiff Mtre Bernard Lefrançois For the defendant Hearing dates: June 19 and 20, 2014