2018 QCCA 1706, 2018 QCCA 1706

Ciarallo c. Deveau Avocats 2018 QCCA 1706 COURT OF APPEAL CANADA PROVINCE OF QUEBEC REGISTRY OF MONTREAL No: 500-09-027643-188 (500-22-237256-170) MINUTES OF THE HEARING DATE: September 28, 2018 THE HONOURABLE GENEVIÈVE MARCOTTE, J.A. PETITIONER MARK ANTHONY CIARALLO PERSONALLY RESPONDENT COUNSEL DEVEAU ET AVOCATS Mtre SIMON DELISLE Mtre SARAH DESCHÊNES (Deveau Gagné Lefebvre Tremblay et Associés sencrl) DESCRIPTION: Application for leave to appeal from a judgment terminating the proceeding rendered on June 6, 2018 by the Honourable Éric Dufour of the Quebec Court, District of Montreal. Clerk: Lory Beauregard Courtroom: RC.18

HEARING 9:30 Commencement of the hearing. Identification of counsel. Exchange between the judge and counsel. 9:58 Resumption of the hearing. Submissions by Me Ciarallo. 10:01 The judge does not need to hear the Respondent. BY THE JUDGE: Judgement – see page 3. 10:03 Conclusion of the hearing. (

s) Lory Beauregard Clerk BY THE JUDGE JUDGMENT [ 1 ] The petitioner is seeking leave to appeal from a judgment rendered by default on June 6, 2018 (although the Application refers to June 7, 2018, the judgment attached to his proceeding is dated June 6, 2018), which reads as follows: JUGEMENT [1] La Cour après avoir étudié la procédure et la preuve; [ 2 ] ATTENDU que la

partie demanderesse réclame 23 240,34 $ à la

partie défenderesse; [ 3 ] CONSIDÉRANT que la

partie défenderesse a quitté la salle d’audience au début de l’instruction; [ 4 ] VU l’absence de preuve de la

partie défenderesse en conséquence; [ 5 ] VU la preuve de la

partie demanderesse, plus particulièrement le témoignage de Me Lynda Renaud et les pièces déposées lors de l’instruction; [ 6 ] CONSIDÉRANT que la

partie demanderesse a prouvé les allégations essentielles de l’action de 23 240,34 $ contre la

partie défenderesse; POUR CES MOTIFS, LE TRIBUNAL : [ 7 ] ACCUEILLE le recours de la

partie demanderesse; [ 8 ] CONDAMNE la

partie défenderesse à payer à la

partie demanderesse 23 240,34 $, avec intérêts au taux de 15 % l’an à compter du 30 e jour de chaque facture émise; [ 9 ] LE TOUT avec frais de justice. [2] Given the value of the subject matter of the dispute in appeal, which is less than 60,000$, leave will only be granted where the petitioner demonstrates that the conditions under

Article 30, paras. 2(1) and 3 C.C.P. are met, being that the matter at issue is one that should be submitted to the Court, because it involves a question of principle, a new issue or an issue of law that has given rise to conflicting judicial decisions. [3] None of the issues raised in the application are related to the judgment of June 6, 2018.

Instead, the petitioner raises issues that pertain to prior judgments rendered in March and April 2018, one of which he sought leave to appeal from this Court without success, or to a prior judgment rendered on May 15, 2018 in the presence of the parties where Justice Dufour dismissed his motion for recusation, his motion to amend his defense and his motion to postpone the hearing, and ordered that the case proceed on the merits. The

petitioner chose at that point to leave the Court room. As a result, the case proceeded without him and a judgment was rendered by default. [4] I am not seized with an application for leave to appeal of the May 15, 2018 judgment but rather with an application for leave to appeal of the judgment rendered by default on June 6, 2018 for which the petitioner alleges no grounds of appeal which could enable me to grant leave. FOR THESE REASONS, THE UNDERSIGNED : [5] DISMISSES the application for leave to appeal of the Quebec Court judgment rendered on June 6, 2018, with legal costs. GENEVIÈVE MARCOTTE , J.A.