2017 QCCQ 8092, 2017 QCCQ 8092

Centuro c. Fibule inc. 2017 QCCQ 8092 COURT OF QUEBEC Small Claims Division CANADA PROVINCE OF QUEBEC DISTRICT OF MONTREAL Civil Division No: 500-32-151755-164 DATE: July 13, 2017 ______________________________________________________________________ BEFORE THE HONOURABLE ERIC DUFOUR, J.C.Q. ______________________________________________________________________ CHARLES CENTURO Plaintiff vs. LA FIBULE INC.

Defendant ______________________________________________________________________ JUDGMENT ______________________________________________________________________ [ 1 ] Plaintiff claims $5,662.08, namely for the rent under a commercial lease, plus electrical bills and its share of different municipal taxes for a total of $2,862.08. [ 2 ] Defendant replies by a cross-demand of $3,086.28 representing the rent that it alleges was paid as a result of misrepresentation concerning the square footage of the space rented. [ 3 ] On July 7 2015, the parties signed a commercial lease [1] .

Defendant’s administrators visited the local three or four times over a period of two weeks prior to the signing of the lease. Witness for the Defendant, Mr. Svein Kikals, says that they were satisfied with the space and decided to rent the premises. [ 4 ] On January 2016, Defendant advised the Plaintiff that it would not renew the lease. Mr. Kikals testified that, from that moment on, Plaintiff became bitter and their relationship became strained. After having considered the situation, he decided to measure the space of the premises. He discovered that it was less than the 750 square foot indicated in

section 1.00 of the lease. He complained to Plaintiff. As nothing came out of their discussion, the Defendant left the space on March 13 2015. [ 5 ] A contract is the law binding on the parties who signed it. Here,

Section 1.00 of the lease specifically provides that the space is “approximately 750 sq.ft.”. Moreover,

section 4.01 indicates that the rent is not based on the square footage of the place. Rather, the parties agreed upon a lump sum of $700 to be paid monthly. [ 6 ] Never before January 2016 did the exact square footage of the premises was of importance to the Defendant. Mr. Kikals even testified that he was satisfied with the place. Anyway, as mentioned above, the lease clearly indicates that the measures of the place were approximate. [ 7 ] The Court now turns to the remainder of Plaintiff’s claims.

Section 5.00 of the lease provides that the Lessee will pay electricity bills.

Section 12.00 provides that the Lessee shall be liable for all water and proportionate building taxes. Plaintiff filed all the bills of Hydro-Québec and the Municipal taxes of the City of Montréal [2] . Plaintiff proved damages of $360 for the water tax, $85 for the garbage tax and $1,430.15 for the proportionate share of municipal building taxes. He also proved $422.47 for Hydro-Québec bills.

The Court however deducted $564.46 for the bills related to the address next to the premises rented. [ 8 ] Plaintiff’s application is well-founded in part whereas Defendant’s cross-demand is not. [ 9 ] FOR THESE REASONS, THE COURT: [ 10 ] GRANTS in part Plaintiff’s action; [ 11 ] CONDEMNS Defendant to pay to Plaintiff $5,097.62, with interests at the legal rate plus additional indemnity provided for in

section 1619 of the Civil Code du Québec , from March 17 2016, with costs of $100 representing the judicial stamp of the application; [ 12 ] DISMISSES the Defendant’s cross-demand. [ 13 ] WITHOUT COSTS.

__________________________________ ERIC DUFOUR, J.C.Q. Date of hearing: July 4, 2017