2017 QCCQ 13591, 2017 QCCQ 13591

Kuffuor c. Sparrow 2017 QCCQ 13591 COURT OF QUEBEC « Small Claim Division » CANADA PROVINCE OF QUEBEC DISTRICT OF GATINEAU LOCALITY OF GATINEAU « Civil Court » N° : 550-32-700515-171 DATE : November 20, 2017 ______________________________________________________________________ BY THE HONOURABLE JUDGE JEAN FAULLEM, J.C.Q. ______________________________________________________________________ KWEKU KUFFUOR Plaintiff c.

TINA SPARROW Defendant ______________________________________________________________________ JUDGMENT ______________________________________________________________________ JF 1075 [ 1 ] The Tribunal has to decide on an application for a review of the decision of the Clerk of the Court of Québec dated October 25, 2017, refusing the Plaintiff’s judicial demand, since his main claim is for damages arising from defamation through the social media Facebook. [ 2 ] More specifically, the Clerk’s reasons are written as follows: “The part of the application alleging defamation is ineligible to Small Claims Division pursuant to

article 537 of Code of Civil Procedure .” [ 3 ] In order to better understand the scope of his judgment, it is appropriate for the Tribunal to reproduce in full the Plaintiff’s claim: The Plaintiff hereby declares that: “1. On or around October 8, 2017, the Defendant caused the following damage to the Plaintiff: Suit jacket stolen $240 stolen liable slander on Facebook and around town loss of 2 mortgage contracts . 2. The Defendant is liable for the damage for the following reasons: Defendant appears to have tried to set me up for what looks to be an extortion attempt by using a Rape allegation .

Furthermore client continues to spread liable slander which has caused me emotional harm and damage to my personal and business relationship . 3. The fault was committed on or around October 8, 2017, at Gatineau (Quebec). 4. The damage has occurred at Gatineau (Quebec). 5. The Plaintiff claims an amount of $14,888.00 for the following reasons: Because the client refuses to return my jacket Stop her liable slander . I am requesting the client to write a letter of apology and recant her liable falsehood on her Facebook page and email list and go through police channels if she wishes to pursue this matter. 6.

The total amount claimed by the Plaintiff is broken down as follows: 750 – 1400 for a new suit (750 for the jacket and 1400 for a full suit) $240 that was stolen from my money carrier 10 000 for the loss of 2 mortgage clients the rest for emotional damage up to but below the allowed limit . 7. Although payment has been duly requested by means of a formal notice, the Defendant has refused or failed to pay.

For these reasons, the Plaintiff asks the court to: Order the Defendant to pay an amount of $14,888.00 to the Plaintiff, with interest at the legal rate, plus the additional indemnity stipulated in

section 1619 of the Civil Code of Québec . Order the Defendant to pay, to the Plaintiff, the court fees of $200.00 associated with this claim.” [Our underlying] [ 4 ] The Plaintiff’s reasons in support of his request for a review of the Clerk’s decision confirm that, with the exception of his claim for the reimbursement of a sum of money and for the cost of his stolen suit, almost all of his claim stems from defamation committed by the Defendant on Facebook. [ 5 ] However, as clearly prescribed by

section 537 of the Québec Code of Civil Procedure [1] ( CPC ), any judicial claim for damages resulting from defamation cannot be lodged with the Small Claims Division. [ 6 ] Also in his application for a review of the Clerk’s decision, Plaintiff argues that denying his claim prevents him from asserting his rights, which would, inter alia, be guaranteed by the Charter of Rights and Freedoms and the Canadian Constitution. [ 7 ] This Plaintiff’s premise is erroneous. [ 8 ] The decision of the Clerk of the Court of Québec to refuse the application filed with the Small Claims Division does not prevent the Plaintiff from asserting his rights before a tribunal.

Only the possibility of introducing the portion of the action that alleges defamation before the Small Claims Division of the Court of Québec is prohibited under

section 537 CPC . However, nothing prevents the Plaintiff from bringing the same action in the Regular Division of the Court of Québec. The Case Law recognizes the validity of the exception of

section 537 CPC, which prohibits the introduction of a judicial demand alleging defamation with the Small Claims Division [2] . [ 9 ] Consequently, in view of the absence of any errors on the part of the Clerk of the Court of Québec when refusing the Plaintiff’s claim with the Small Claims Division, the application for a review of this decision is dismiss. [ 10 ] FOR THESE REASONS, THE TRIBUNAL: [ 11 ] DISMISSES the Plaintiff’s application for a review of the decision of the Clerk of the Court of Québec of October 25, 2017; [ 12 ] WITHOUT legal costs. __________________________________ JEAN FAULLEM, J.C.Q .