2017 QCCQ 3050, 2017 QCCQ 3050

Markou c. CNESST 2017 QCCQ 3050 JG2338 COURT OF QUEBEC Small Claims Division CANADA PROVINCE OF QUEBEC DISTRICT OF BEAUHARNOIS LOCALITY OF VAUDREUIL-DORION Civil Division No: 760-32-017241-151 DATE: April 5, 2017 ______________________________________________________________________ IN THE PRESENCE OF THE HONOURABLE CÉLINE GERVAIS, J.Q.C. ______________________________________________________________________ Nickolas MARKOU Plaintiff v. CNESST Defendant ______________________________________________________________________ JUDGMENT ______________________________________________________________________ [ 1 ] Mr.

Nickolas Markou claims from the Commission des normes de l’équité de la santé et de la sécurité du travail (CNESST) an amount of $ 2693, representing various disbursements and time invested in different files that he pretends were not handled correctly for him by the CNESST. [ 2 ] Mr. Markou’s demand is not very detailed, it reads as follows: “CNT owns me $ 2693 for worked hours on files, due sums by former employers and for registered letter that I sent out to get Justice.” [ 3 ] His claim is more detailed in the Letter of Demand he sent to the CNESST on October 6, 2015, exhibit P-9.

It is as follows: • $ 1500 for the file on Ilyos, the gas and 40 hours spent; • $ 211 for 20 hours spent on Mr. Pelletier’s file for not doing anything about me losing my job at IGA from Mr. Benito telling my boss I am trouble and I should be fired; • $ 500 for time in legal efforts made to collect from Orange Café and Casa Grecque; • $ 60 for six registered letters; • $ 422 for 40 hours of labour in pursuing what is already paid for by the working class citizens. [ 4 ] From the letter P-9, the Court understands that Mr. Markou’s claims for $ 422 is related to his file with Metro, as the CNESST closed his file.

THE FACTS: [ 5 ] From Mr. Markou’s testimony and exhibit D-17, which is a list of files handled for Mr. Markou by the CNESST, the Court establishes as follows a list of Mr. Markou’s last employers: - Restaurant Ilyos (9229-7019 Québec inc.) – file opened at the CNESST on December 14, 2010;

- IGA (employment terminated at the beginning of 2012 after three months); - Château Vaudreuil – file closed at the CNESST on February 2013; - La Belle province (9074-6520 Québec inc.) – files opened at the CNESST on June 3 and 27, 2014; - Metro – February 9, 2015; - Casa Grecque – Letter of Demand sent by Mr. Markou on July 14, 2015 – he received the cheque for his pay on October 2, 2015; - Orange Café (9115-5663 Québec inc.) from April 13 to June 21, 2015 – Letter of Demand sent on July 14, 2015 – settled for $ 1250. File opened at the CNESST May 3, 2016 and closed on August 2016. [ 6 ] Mr.

Markou feels discriminated by the CNESST, as appears from his letters of August 5 and October 6, 2015, claiming that there is animosity between him and the CNESST from past dealings between them. ANALYSIS AND DECISION: Restaurant Ilyos: [ 7 ] In this file, opened by the CNESST on December 14, 2010, an agreement intervened between Mr. Markou and Ilyos on October 31, 2011. Unfortunately, Ilyos filed for bankruptcy on November 20, 2012, and the CNESST could not recover for Mr. Markou the amount of the agreement, which was supposed to be paid on November 30, 2011.

CNESST sent a final notice to Ilyos on December 2011. [ 8 ] Mr. Markou seems to claim from CNESST the amount he should have received from Ilyos. [ 9 ] To succeed in this claim, Mr. Markou had to prove that the CNESST committed a fault in their management of the Ilyos’ file. The file does not show that any fault was committed by the CNESST, who cannot be responsible for the bankruptcy of an employer. IGA: [ 10 ] Mr. Markou pretends that he lost his job at IGA on the same day that his former boss, Mr. Benito, from Château Vaudreuil, was seen at the supermarket. He asked the CNESST to send a letter to Mr.

Benito asking that he stops giving bad references about him. It is not within the mandate of the CNESST to write such letters, and there is no fault from the CNESST in the IGA file. Mr. Nicolas Belisle, responsible of the complaints management, testified that he studied Mr. Markou’s file, and that the CNESST could not intervene, as Mr. Benito was not Mr. Markou’s employer. Orange Café and Casa Grecque: [ 11 ] CNESST opened a file for Orange Café for a verification regarding 44 employees.

After the CNESST intervened, Orange Café changed their practises and when an inspection was done on August 2016, everything was compliant with the law. [ 12 ] The Court understood from Mr. Markou’s testimony that he decided to handle himself his files with Orange Café and Casa Grecque. He cannot afterwards sue the CNESST for the time he invested to collect himself what was due to him. Metro: [ 13 ] Mr. Markou alleges that on February 9, 2015, he worked three or four hours for Metro, and that he was never called back to work. He says he had an agreement with Metro that the hours he spent would be paid to him.

He filed a complaint at the CNESST, who asked him on various occasions to specify the details of his claim, namely to prove that he was indeed employed by Metro, and his working conditions, especially his hourly rate and the number of hours he has worked. [ 14 ] When the CNESST started their inquiry, they obtained the version of Metro, who said that Mr. Markou was not an employee, but was called for an interview, which lasted a few hours, during which he was asked to do some meat cuts, as he was applying for a job as a butcher.

Metro said that he did not meet their requirements and that his application was not accepted. Metro said that they were not obligated to pay for someone’s interview. Mr. Markou strongly denies this version. [ 15 ] CNESST explained to Mr. Markou that they were having the burden of proving that salary was in fact due to him, and that with the information they had in the file, they did not feel they could meet that burden of proof. They refused to file a Demand against Metro on behalf of Mr. Markou. [ 16 ] Mr. Markou contested, asked for a revision, and the CNESST maintained its decision. [ 17 ] Considering Mr.

Markou’s correspondence, and the risks that an action taken for 60 $ or so would be dismissed, the Court can find no fault from CNESST to have refused to continue Mr. Markou’s file against Metro. [ 18 ] As no fault can be attributed to the CNESST in their management of all Mr. Markou’s files, he cannot claim the registered letters fees, nor the value of his time.

FOR ALL THESE REASONS, THE COURT: DISMISSES the Demand without costs. __________________________________ CÉLINE GERVAIS, J.Q.C.