RV Center 2018 QCCQ 9590, 2018 QCCQ 9590

Marcil c. Gacin's RV Center 2018 QCCQ 9590 COURT OF QUEBEC Small Claims Division CANADA PROVINCE OF QUEBEC DISTRICT OF BEDFORD TOWN OF GRANBY Civil Division No: 460-32-700562-183 DATE: December 21th, 2018 ______________________________________________________________________ BY THE HONOURABLE MARTIN TÉTREAULT, J.C.Q. ______________________________________________________________________ CATHERINE MARCIL Plaintiff v.

GACIN’S RV CENTER Defendant ______________________________________________________________________ JUDGMENT ON DEFENDANT’S DECLINATORY APPLICATION ______________________________________________________________________ [ 1 ] The Defendant asks this Court to dismiss Plaintiff’s Application because its head office is in Newfoundland and the sale of the trailer which is the object of the Application took place in that province. [ 2 ] Plaintiff contests Defendant’s request on the basis that the sale is a consumer contract.

Since she lives in the district of Bedford in the province of Quebec, she had the right to sue in this district. [ 3 ] Defendant refers to

section 3114 of the Civil Code of Québec (“C.C.Q.”) and the legal maxim lex loci contractus to support its position. However, this

section does not apply to the status of procedure but to the law which would govern the determination of the cogency of the recourse. [ 4 ] In view of

section 3149 C.c.Q. plaintiff’s arguments cannot be withheld: “ Québec authorities also have jurisdiction to hear an action based on a consumer contract or a contract of employment if the consumer or worker has his domicile or residence in Québec; the waiver of such jurisdiction by the consumer or worker may not be set up against him.” [ 5 ] In the present case, the allegations of the Application and the exhibits filed make prima facie proof that the recourse involves a consumer contract. [ 6 ] Since the Plaintiff’s domicile or residence is in Saint-Paul-d’Abbotsford, she had the right to file her recourse in the juridical district of Bedford in the province of Quebec. [ 7 ] Defendant’s request must therefore be dismissed. [ 8 ] FOR THESE REASONS, THE COURT: [ 9 ] DISMISSES Defendant’s request to transfer or dismiss Plaintiff’s Application; [ 10 ] WITHOUT JUDICIAL COSTS . __________________________________ Martin Tétreault, J.C.Q.