2012 QCCQ 7167, 2012 QCCQ 7167

Adlam c. Herard 2012 QCCQ 7167 JV0516 COUR DU QUÉBEC « Small Claims Division » CANADA PROVINCE DE QUÉBEC DISTRICT DE MONTRÉAL « Chambre civile » N° : 500-32-122393-103 DATE : September 25, 2012 ______________________________________________________________________ SOUS LA PRÉSIDENCE DE : L’HONORABLE SUZANNE VADBONCOEUR, J.C.Q. ______________________________________________________________________ WINSOME ADLAM […] Pierrefonds (Qc) […] Plaintiff c.

WILFRID HERARD […] Dollard-des-Ormeaux (Qc) […] Defendant ______________________________________________________________________ JUDGEMENT RENDered on the bench ______________________________________________________________________ For the reasons expressed verbally in court, registered numerically and summarized hereinafter, the Court renders judgement as follows : [ 1 ] Plaintiff's claim against Defendant is in the amount of 7 500$ reduced to 7 000$ to be in conformity with the Small Claims Court's jurisdiction. [ 2 ] It is related to two loans consented to the Defendant, namely one of 5 500$ to help him to pay off his debts, and the other, of 2 000$, to pay his lawyer's fees. [ 3 ] It is the duty and the burden of the Plaintiff to demonstrate to the Court that her claim is well founded, according to sections 2803 and 2804 of the Civil Code of Québec . [ 4 ] She did not meet that burden as far as the second loan is concerned : the proof is contradictory and there is no document whatsoever that could demonstrate the existence of such a loan. [ 5 ] The Court does not reach the same conclusion as to the second loan : the bank statement P-3 shows a withdrawal of 5500$ from the account of Plantiff's son, Garfield; this evidence supports her version of what happened : she borrowed the money from her son in order to give it to the Defendant.

It also corresponds to the written testimony of her son. [ 6 ] Defendant used the money to pay three credit card accounts, namely President's Choice, Sears and Canadian Tire.

Both parties agree on that point. [ 7 ] Even though Plaintiff may have given several gifts to Defendant, her boyfriend at that time, the Court thinks that the 5 500$ loan was not a gift; the Court believes the Plaintiff when she says so. [ 8 ] On the other hand, the Defendant cannot prove anything he says, he has no receipt, no bank or credit card account statements; he cannot prove that he had access to Plaintiff's bank account and that he often used her debit card. The Court does not believe him.

FOR THESE REASONS THE COURT : Grants , in part, Plaintiff's claim; CONDEMNS the Defendant to pay to Plaintiff the sum of 5 500$ with interest at the rate of 5% per annum as of February 10, 2010, plus judicial disbursements in the amount of 157$.

__________________________________ SUZANNE VADBONCOEUR, J.C.Q. Date of hearing : September 25, 2012