2015 QCCQ 3519, 2015 QCCQ 3519

Tsarouhas c. Aeroplan Reward Department 2015 QCCQ 3519 COURT OF QUEBEC « Small Claims Division » CANADA PROVINCE OF QUEBEC DISTRICT OF MONTREAL « Civil Division » No: 500-32-141393-142 DATE: April 22, 2015 ______________________________________________________________________ BY THE HONOURABLE DOMINIQUE GIBBENS, J.C.Q. ______________________________________________________________________ GEORGE TSAROUHAS Plaintiff v. AEROPLAN REWARD DEPARTMENT -and- AIMIA CANADA INC.

Defendants ______________________________________________________________________ JUDGMENT ______________________________________________________________________ [ 1 ] George Tsarouhas claims damages of $2,875.71 from the Aeroplan Reward Department and Aimia Canada Inc. after he was required to pay for a stay at a Fairmont hotel for which he purchased a travel reward with his Aeroplan miles. He claims that the Defendants are at fault because the hotel required a certificate that he did not receive. [ 2 ] The Aeroplan Reward Department is not a legal entity and cannot be sued.

The Aeroplan loyalty program is owned and operated by Aimia Canada Inc. (« Aimia »), who contested the action. [ 3 ] Aimia denies any liability towards Mr. Tsarouhas. It claims that Mr. Tsarouhas received the reward certificate required by the hotel, that he was clearly advised that the certificate had to be presented and surrendered at check-in and that he failed to do so. QUESTIONS IN ISSUE [ 4 ] This case raises the following questions:

a) Did Aimia breach the terms and conditions of the Aeroplan reward program by failing to provide Mr. Tsarouhas with the reward certificate?

b) If so, is Mr. Tsarouhas entitled to compensation for the damages claimed? CONTEXT [ 5 ] In December 2012, Mr. Tsarouhas redeemed 28,000 of his Aeroplan miles in exchange for a one-night stay at one of the Fairmont, Raffles or Swissôtel hotels. [ 6 ] Mr. Tsarouhas purchased this reward on the Aeroplan website.

When he completed the transaction, he was required to accept terms and conditions that contained the following language: « This Reward Experience is for two individuals and includes: • One night accommodation certificate for a Fairmont Hotel or Resort, Raffles Hotel or Resort or a Swissôtel or Resort (Collection A, Standard Room Category) at one of the many destinations listed below. • […] Certificates are the form of payment to the hotel and must be handed to the hotel when you check-in. Model #: Collection A» (our emphasis) [ 7 ] After exchanging his Aeroplan miles for this travel reward, Mr.

Tsarouhas received from Aeroplan a packing slip [1] referring to a “Fairmont Collection A – Standard Room” certificate, but Mr. Tsarouhas does not remember receiving the certificate itself. Aimia’s representative insists that it was attached to the packing slip. [ 8 ] In November 2013, a reservation was made at the Fairmont Château Laurier hotel in Ottawa for Mr. Tsarouhas and his wife, for a one-night stay on December 2 nd , 2013. [ 9 ] On November 11, 2013, Mr. Tsarouhas received an email confirming this reservation, which contained the following note:

« IMPORTANT: per the Terms and Conditions it is required to present and surrender Ovation Rewards certificates at time of check-in for payment. (photocopies are not accepted) » [ 10 ] Mr. Tsarouhas arrived at the Château Laurier on December 2 nd , 2013. On check-in, the hotel required the reward certificate as payment, but Mr. Tsarouhas did not have it. He attempted to reach an Aeroplan representative to obtain a certificate, to no avail. He therefore had to pay for the room. [ 11 ] Mr.

Tsarouhas claims damages of $2,875.71 consisting of various costs incurred for his trip to the Château Laurier hotel and damages of $2,000 for loss of enjoyment of life for him and his wife. ANALYSIS [ 12 ] Mr. Tsarouhas has the burden of proving the facts on which his claim is based on a balance of probabilities. [2] [ 13 ] When Mr. Tsarouhas exchanged his Aeroplan miles for a stay at a Fairmont hotel, he accepted the terms and conditions applicable to the exchange. These clearly refer to an accommodation certificate to be presented and surrendered to the hotel at check-in as payment for the stay.

This requirement is also mentioned in the email reservation confirmation that Mr. Tsarouhas received on November 11, 2013. [ 14 ] Mr. Tsarouhas acknowledges that he received a packing slip that refers to the Fairmont certificate. He does not remember that the certificate was attached to the packing slip, but the Court prefers the testimony of Aimia’s representative that it was indeed attached. [ 15 ] On a balance of probabilities, the Court concludes that Mr.

Tsarouhas did receive the reward certificate, which he should have presented to the hotel as payment as per the terms and conditions that he accepted. [ 16 ] Consequently, Aimia has committed no fault giving rise to liability towards Mr. Tsarouhas for the damages claimed. FOR THESE REASONS, THE COURT: DISMISSES the action; WITH COSTS in the amount of $144 representing the judicial stamp of the contestation. __________________________________ DOMINIQUE GIBBENS, J.C.Q. Date of hearing: March 6, 2015