2017 QCCA 1069, 2017 QCCA 1069

Bohbot c. Lavery, De Billy 2017 QCCA 1069 COURT OF APPEAL CANADA PROVINCE OF QUEBEC REGISTRY OF MONTREAL No: 500-09-026684-175 (500-17-084282-147) MINUTES OF THE HEARING DATE: July 4, 2017 CORAM: THE HONOURABLE manon savard , J.A. geneviève marcotte , J.A. mark schrager , J.A. APPELLANTS COUNSEL JOHANNA BOHBOT JOHANNA BOHBOT, in her capacity as trustee to the OR SHALOM FAMILY TRUST 8607354 CANADA INC. Mtre RONALD M. AUCLAIR (Dunton Rainville) RESPONDENT COUNSEL LAVERY, DE BILLY, s.e.n.c.r.l. Mtre luc thibaudeau Mtre dominique vallières (Lavery, de Billy, s.e.n.c.r.l.)

On appeal from a judgment rendered on January 30, 2017 by the Honourable Justice Florence Lucas of the Superior Court, District of Montreal DESCRIPTION : Application to dismiss an appeal (Article 365 C.C.P .) Clerk: Robert Osadchuck Courtroom: Pierre-Basile-Mignault HEARING 9:40 Commencement of the hearing. 9:41 Submissions by Mtre Thibaudeau. 9:44 Submissions by Mtre Auclair 10:12 Reply by Mtre Thibaudeau. 10:15 Recess. 10:25 Resumption of the hearing. 10:26 By the Court: judgment – see page 3.

Robert Osadchuck Clerk BY THE COURT JUDGMENT [ 1 ] The appeal raises three grounds – all questions of fact including the third submission regarding the paulian action which although submitted as an error of law only raises factual determinations made by the judge. [ 2 ] After five days of hearing and 47 pages of judgment examining in detail all the circumstances of the case and questioning personal Appellant’s credibility and good faith, the judge decided that the claim for legal fees of Respondent of $296,398 was due by Appellant. [ 3 ] The fees were billed on a progress basis over the life of a prolonged contested estate file.

The defenses raised at trial by Appellants were never invoked during the progress of the services rendered with which Appellant expressed satisfaction. She certainly did not complain about the billings received. Respondents were considerate enough to continue to render services notwithstanding that they were not paid, given Appellant’s inability to pay, at least until title to the immoveable bequeathed to her was obtained. [ 4 ] In all of the above circumstances, the judgment is well founded and the appeal has no reasonable chance of success and should be dismissed.

That being said, there is no evidence of abuse before this Court so that Respondent’s conclusion in this regard cannot be

granted. FOR ALL THE FOREGOING REASONS, THE COURT: [ 5 ] GRANTS in part the motion with legal costs; [ 6 ] DISMISSES the appeal with legal costs. MANON SAVARD, J.A. GENEVIÈVE MARCOTTE, J.A. MARK SCHRAGER, J.A.