2013 QCCQ 3392, 2013 QCCQ 3392

BS Pannu Transportation Inc. c. 9133-3286 Québec inc. 2013 QCCQ 3392 COURT OF QUEBEC Small Claims Division CANADA PROVINCE OF QUEBEC DISTRICT OF MONTREAL TOWN OF MONTREAL Civil Division No: 500-32-128402-114 DATE: February 28, 2013 ______________________________________________________________________ BY THE HONOURABLE SUZANNE HANDMAN, J.C.Q. ______________________________________________________________________ B. S. PANNU TRANSPORTATION INC. 8907, Leroux, app.

A, LaSalle (QC) H8R 3V7 Plaintiff v. 9133-3286 QUEBEC INC. 1533, Hébert, LaSalle (QC) H8N 2M9 Defendant ______________________________________________________________________ JUDGMENT ______________________________________________________________________ [ 1 ] Plaintiff, B.S. Pannu Transportation inc. (“Pannu”), is claiming $5,280 from 9133-3286 Quebec inc. (“Quebec inc.”) representing unpaid wages. Quebec inc. admits to owing Pannu $2,500 but denies the rest of the claim. [ 2 ] Judgment was rendered twice in this file against Quebec inc., first on September 28, 2011 and then on October 1, 2012.

The judgment dated September 28, 2011 was revoked. The hearing was then scheduled for October 1, 2012 and judgment was rendered against Quebec inc.. The company then submitted a motion for revocation of judgment, which was received on November 16, 2012. [ 3 ] At trial, Quebec inc. maintained it had not received the notice of the hearing. The Court advised the parties it was taking the motion under advisement and that judgment would be rendered on the motion for revocation and the merits of the case, at the same time.

The evidence: [ 4 ] Quebec inc., operates in the area of long haul transportation and provides services for a company called Highland. Quebec inc. hired Pannu to drive one of its trailers and deliver goods from Montreal to Vancouver and return. Pannu began driving for Quebec inc. in February 2011. Its services ended in April 2011. [ 5 ] Pannu’s remuneration was set at $2,500 for every two trips from Montreal to Vancouver and back. Pannu received its first payment. However, after carrying out four return trips, it received only $2,500 and the cheque was returned because of insufficient funds.

Pannu has not been paid for these four return trips, which amount to $5,000 plus $280 for layovers, and is claiming these sums. [ 6 ] In its written contestation, Quebec inc. submitted that Pannu was involved in an accident and it required Pannu to cover the costs involved or work for Quebec inc. for a minimum of one year. In Court, Quebec inc. acknowledged it never received a claim for damages and the accident has nothing to do with its refusal to pay Pannu. [ 7 ] Quebec inc. then admitted it owed Pannu $2,500 but denied owing the remainder of Pannu’s claim.

It submitted that Pannu had been advised, at the outset, the first two weeks of service consisted of a training period, without pay, and therefore the total amount of Pannu’s claim should be $2,500 and not $5,280. [ 8 ] Pannu denied any discussion about a training period, without pay, adding that it had provided driving services for three years

prior to working for Quebec inc.. Analysis: [ 9 ] The Court accepts that Quebec inc. did not receive the hearing notices and grants the revocation of judgment. [ 10 ] As for the merits of the case, Pannu has established to the satisfaction of the Court the allegations of its claim. [ 11 ] Firstly, Quebec inc. admits it owes $2,500 for part of the services rendered by Pannu. With respect to the remainder of the claim, Quebec first alleged it was withholding funds because of an accident.

After acknowledging that no claim had ever been made regarding the accident, it changed its defence, alleging it had not paid Pannu because a two week training period, without pay, was foreseen. [ 12 ] The Court does not find this allegation credible. Pannu denied any such agreement. It had worked in the field of transportation in the past and submitted that it did not require training. [ 13 ] Pannu had provided long haul driving services to T & S Transportation System inc. from November 2009 to the fall of 2010. In December 2010, Pannu began to work for CAT.

Pannu presented letters from both companies, which confirm Mr. Pannu’s ability as a driver. Both companies expressed satisfaction with Pannu’s services. [ 14 ] The Court does not accept that Pannu would agree to provide two round trips across the country, without remuneration, in order to obtain training, considering that it had previously worked in the transportation industry in the past. [ 15 ] Pannu has established, to the satisfaction of the Court, the allegations of its claim and is entitled to be paid.

FOR THESE REASONS, THE COURT: GRANTS the motion to introduce proceedings; CONDEMNS 9133-3286 Quebec inc. to pay B.S. Pannu Transportation Inc. $5,280 with interest at the legal rate and the additional indemnity foreseen by

article 1619 C.C.Q., since April 20, 2011, plus judicial fees of $207. __________________________________ SUZANNE HANDMAN, J.C.Q. Date of hearing: February 11, 2013