2012 QCCQ 7042, 2012 QCCQ 7042

6781900 Canada inc. (DHM Renovations) c. Lorente 2012 QCCQ 7042 JM1606 COURT OF QUEBEC "Small Claims Division" CANADA PROVINCE OF QUEBEC DISTRICT OF MONTREAL Civil Division N° : 500-32-121178-109 DATE : September 21, 2012 ______________________________________________________________________ BY THE HONOURABLE ELIANA MARENGO, J.C.Q. ______________________________________________________________________ 6781900 CANADA INC. doing business under the firm and style name of DHM RENOVATIONS Plaintiff v.

ALICIA LORENTE Defendant ______________________________________________________________________ JUDGMENT ______________________________________________________________________ [ 1 ] GIVEN the evidence; [ 2 ] WHEREAS plaintiff is a licensed general contractor; [ 3 ] WHEREAS a verbal contract of enterprise intervened between the parties, on or about August 25, 2009, for the renovation of defendant's home; [ 4 ] WHEREAS the parties wilfully chose to transact without the benefit of a written contract or the issuance of invoices, with a view to avoid their fiscal responsibilities; [ 5 ] WHEREAS this way of operating is prohibited by law and against public order; [ 6 ] WHEREAS a contract, the cause of which is prohibited by law or contrary to public order, is null ( s. 1411 of the Civil Code of Quebec ); [ 7 ] WHEREAS a contract that is null, is deemed never to have existed; and, in such a case, each party is bound to restore to the other the prestations he has received (s. 1422 C.C.Q.); [ 8 ] WHEREAS plaintiff is claiming the balance owing on the price of the work performed; [ 9 ] WHEREAS defendant is alleging incomplete and shoddy work; [ 10 ] WHEREAS the Court shall not enforce an agreement which is contrary to law and public order; [ 11 ] WHEREAS , however, restitution under s. 1699 C.C.Q. is not feasible, under the circumstances; [ 12 ] GIVEN s. 1700 C.C.Q.; [ 13 ] GIVEN the absence of proper documentation and accounting; given the work carried out; given the contestation; and given the absence of experts' reports in the file; [ 14 ] WHEREAS , however, the pictures filed by defendant show that plaintiff did not execute the flooring work in accordance with

usual practice and the rules of art (s. 2100 C.C.Q.); [ 15 ] GIVEN s. 1699 (2) C.C.Q.; [ 16 ] WHEREAS , in its discretion, the Court shall modify the scope and mode of the restitution [1] ; [ 17 ] WHEREAS , finally, both parties, as stated above, acted contrary to the law and to public order; WHEREFORE THE COURT HEREBY: GRANTS plaintiff's application as amended, in part; SENTENCES defendant to pay plaintiff the sum of $1,500.00, without interest or legal indemnity; EACH PARTY PAYING ITS OWN COSTS . __________________________________ ELIANA MARENGO, J.C.Q. Date of hearing : September 4, 2012