2019 QCCA 106, 2019 QCCA 106

Cohen c. Cohen 2019 QCCA 106 COURT OF APPEAL CANADA PROVINCE OF QUEBEC REGISTRY OF MONTREAL No: 500-09-027867-183 (500-17-087621-150) MINUTES OF THE HEARING DATE: JANUARY 21, 2019 CORAM: THE HONOURABLE JACQUES CHAMBERLAND , J.A. GENEVIÈVE MARCOTTE , J.A. PATRICK HEALY , J.A. APPELLANTS COUNSEL BEN COHEN 7122918 CANADA INC. Mtre ROBERT PANCER (Phillips Friedman Kotler) RESPONDENT COUNSEL DANIEL COHEN Mtre EMMANUELLE SOLENN NOHAD KHOURY Mtre PIERRE-JUDE THERMIDOR (Holmested & associé

s) On appeal from a judgment rendered August 28, 2018 by the Honourable Justice Gregory Moore of the Superior Court, District of Montreal

DESCRIPTION : Application to dismiss the appeal and to declare the appeal abusive and subsidiarily application for provision of a suretyship (Articles 51, 364 and 365 C.C.P .) Clerk: Robert Osadchuck Courtroom: Pierre-Basile-Mignault HEARING 10:17 Commencement of the hearing. Identification of counsel. 10:17 Submissions by Mtre Pancer. 10:45 Submissions by Mtre Khoury. 10:55 Reply by Mtre Pancer. 11:00 Recess. 11:22 Resumption of the hearing. 11:22 Judgment – see page 3.

Robert Osadchuck Clerk BY THE COURT JUDGMENT [ 1 ] After a trial of four days, the trial judge delivered a judgment that is thoroughly reasoned and that fully explains his evaluation of the evidence and the reasons for which he reached his conclusions. [ 2 ] The existence of the judgment debt is not in dispute. [ 3 ] The questions raised on the appeal are questions of fact or, at the outer limit, mixed questions of fact and law.

Moreover, the issues raised will not change the outcome of the case, given the factual conclusions that “Ben is 712”, meaning that appellant Ben Cohen used 7122918 Canada inc. for his personal benefit and that he is personally responsible for the corporation’s failure to pay the respondent for his shares in the last 6 years. [ 4 ] On any assessment of the Notice of appeal the appellants seek only to retry the case. [ 5 ] There is no basis on which to identify precisely any ground that could suggest any palpable and overriding error justifying the Court to intervene. [ 6 ] The inescapable conclusion is that the appeal presents no reasonable chance of success and, for this reason, the appeal must be dismissed. [ 7 ] However, the Court will not declare the appeal abusive.

FOR THESE REASONS, THE COURT: [ 8 ] GRANTS the respondent’s Motion to dismiss the appeal;

[ 9 ] DISMISSES the appeal; [ 10 ] With legal costs against the appellants, both on the Motion to dismiss the appeal and on the appeal. JACQUES CHAMBERLAND, J.A. GENEVIÈVE MARCOTTE, J.A. PATRICK HEALY, J.A.