2012 QCCQ 1486, 2012 QCCQ 1486

Tsoukas c. McKeown 2012 QCCQ 1486 COURT OF QUEBEC Small Claims Division CANADA PROVINCE OF QUEBEC DISTRICT OF MONTREAL TOWN OF MONTREAL Civil Division No: 500-32-118489-097 DATE: February 21, 2012 ______________________________________________________________________ BY THE HONOURABLE DAVID L. CAMERON, J.C.Q. ______________________________________________________________________ GEORGE ORESTES TSOUKAS […] Westmount, Quebec […] Plaintiff v.

CAROL McKEOWN […] Montreal, Quebec […] Defendant -and- GEORGE TSOUKAS […] Montreal, Quebec […] Impleaded party ______________________________________________________________________ JUDGMENT ______________________________________________________________________ [ 1 ] The Plaintiff, George Orestes Tsoukas, claims the restitution of a sum of $10,000 (reduced to $7,000, the limit of the Small- Claim Division) remitted to the Defendant August 14, 2006.

The Plaintiff, Mr Tsoukas, alleges that he remitted the funds to the Defendant in her capacity as financial adviser in order to purchase an investment in AETE Inc. that the Defendant had proposed to him. [ 2 ] Despite numerous requests, the Defendant failed to deliver share certificates and did not establish in any way that the shares had been acquired on behalf of Mr Tsoukas. [ 3 ] In her written contestation, Carol McKeown alleges that the share certificate evidencing the investment in AETE Inc. was remitted to the Plaintiff's father, Mr George Tsoukas, who is acting on his behalf. [ 4 ] She impleaded Mr Tsoukas, the father, for a complete solution to the case. [ 5 ] In a statement in lieu of testimony duly filed in the Court record, and not challenged by the Defendant, Doctor George Michael Tsoukas declares that he had nothing to do with the situation, did not act on behalf of his son and, at no time, received any stock certificate from the Defendant. [ 6 ] Carol McKeown failed to attend the hearing, despite having been duly summoned and called on the P.A. system several times. [ 7 ] The Plaintiff's testimony and the statement in lieu of testimony of his father make it clear that Carol McKeown received a cheque for $10,000 and deposited it to her account failing to purchase the securities she had convinced the Plaintiff to buy and, when put in default, failing to return the funds.

There is every indication that Mr Tsoukas is simply the victim of a fraud. [ 8 ] Carol McKeown and her husband, Daniel F. Ryan, convinced him to invest in these securities, simply pocketed the money and resisted any attempts to obtain information. [ 9 ] Eventually, the Defendant contrived a defence that was intended merely to slow the Plaintiff down. [ 10 ] A "COMMUNIQUÉ" of the Autorité des Marchés Financiers (P-6) shows that Carol McKeown and Daniel F. Ryan were

subjected to various measures including an interdiction to engage in any operation in securities and to exercise the activity of financial adviser. [ 11 ] As far as the Plaintiff is concerned, the Defendant has disappeared without a trace. FOR THESE REASONS, THE COURT: CONDEMNS the Defendant, Carol McKeown, to pay, to the Plaintiff the sum of $7,000, together with interest at the legal rate of 5% per annum and the additional indemnity provided at

article 1619 of the Civil Code of Quebec , calculated from March 10, 2009; CONDEMNS the Defendant to pay, to the Plaintiff, judicial costs in the amount of $157. __________________________________ DAVID L. CAMERON, J.C.Q. Date of hearing: February 6, 2012