2018 QCCQ 8754, 2018 QCCQ 8754

Plewa c. 9245-8843 Québec inc. (Re/Max Action SZ) 2018 QCCQ 8754 COURT OF QUEBEC «Small Claims. Division» CANADA PROVINCE OF QUÉBEC DISTRICT OF MONTRÉAL «Civil Division»

No: 500-32-155135-165 DATE: October 3, 2018 ______________________________________________________________________ BEFORE THE HONOURABLE DOMINIQUE VÉZINA, J.C.Q. ______________________________________________________________________ GERALD PLEWA and CARMELA PLEWA Plaintiffs v. 9245-8843 QUEBEC INC. (Re/Max Action S.Z.) and SANDRA ZELIKOVIC Defendants ______________________________________________________________________ JUDGMENT ______________________________________________________________________ [ 1 ] Gerald Plewa and Carmela Plewa (the Plewa) are suing 9245-8843 Quebec inc. (Re/Max Action S.Z.) and their real estate broker Sandra Zelikovic (Mrs.

Zelikovic) in view of a lien registered on the title of the property they bought as they were delayed for their occupancy date. The Plewa are claiming $11,298.77 from Re/Max and Mrs. Zelikovic alleging the negligence of the real estate broker which, in turn, triggered her liability and caused them damages, also imposing such liability to her company. [ 2 ] Re/Max and Mrs. Zelikovic deny owing such amount, pleading that the title’s problem of the property felt under the liability of either the notary or the vendors, but was not within the scope of a real estate broker mandate.

According to them, no negligence or mistake can be proven against them. QUESTION IN ISSUE Has the Plewa established the negligence of Re/Max and Mrs. Zelikovic triggering her professional liability? In the affirmative, what are the damages suffered by the Plewa? CONTEXT AND ANALYSIS [ 3 ] On January 25, 2016 [1] , Mrs. Zelikovic concluded an exclusive brokerage contract with the vendors of the property located on [M...] Street (the [M...] property). [ 4 ] Prior to signing such contract, Mrs. Zelikovic verified the title on the property.

According to the deed of sale, on April 13, 2003, Antoinette Sarah Cava was the owner. Then, in 2013, as she passed away, a declaration of transmission of the property was issued where the devolution of said property went to Lorraine Minna, Joan Minna and Jane Minna (the Minna sisters) . [2] [ 5 ] The Minna sisters signed the exclusive brokerage contract with Mrs. Zelikovic, after the latter verified their identity. [ 6 ] Mrs.

Zelikovic then ordered the issuance of a new certificate of localisation, checked the index of the immovable, went to the City Hall to get the data regarding the taxes, obtained the seller’s declaration and started planning the listing, measuring and taking pictures of the [M...] property. [ 7 ] On April 4, 2016, Mrs.

Zelikovic signed another exclusive brokerage contract with the Plewa regarding their own property located on [F...] Street (the [F...] property) . [ 8 ] On April 22, 2016, a promise to purchase the [F...] property was accepted. [ 9 ] On April 28, 2016 [3] , the Plewa then promised to purchase the [M...] property providing for an occupancy date on June 22, 2016. [ 10 ] Unfortunately, the Plewa could not become owners of the [M...] property before August 19, 2016. Indeed, a lien on the property was noted by the notary when checking the title. The Plewa, Re/Max and Mrs.

Zelikovic were made aware of this new fact at the end of May / beginning of June 2016. [ 11 ] The lien [4] , dated February 8, 2016, read as follows:

[…] Nature de l’avis

Avis de préinscription d’un droit de propriété et action en prête-nom que le demandeur a institué contre les défenderesses Lorraine Minna-Mackinnon, Jane Minna, Joan Minna et al. visant à faire déclarer le demandeur propriétaire de l’immeuble (condo) connu et décrit comme étant celui situé au [M...]. […] Nature du droit faisant l’objet de la demande Le jugement à être rendu éventuellement en conséquence de cette action est susceptible de confirmer le droit de propriété en faveur de Moishe Sklar, qui est admis à l’inscription sur le registre foncier relativement à l’immeuble. […] (Exact reproduction) [ 12 ] Lawyers were involved to resolve the problem with the title, with success. [ 13 ] However, because of the delay to clear the title, the Plewa are claiming for the loss of interests on the capital they withdrew in June 2016, the additional extra costs for some renovations work, stress and anxiety and their lawyer’s fees.

Has the Plewa established the negligence of Re/Max and Mrs. Zelikovic triggering her professional liability? In the affirmative, what are the damages suffered by the Plewa? [ 14 ] In civil matters, a person wishing to assert a right shall prove the facts on which his claim is based. [5] The burden of proof [6] lies on the party presenting a demand. That party has to present evidence which will be weighed on the balance of probabilities which is also called preponderance of evidence. [7] [ 15 ] The Plewa have entered into a contract of services with Re/Max and Mrs. Zelikovic. [8] [ 16 ] Mrs.

Zelikovic must comply with an obligation of means and satisfy the Court that she had done what another real estate broker placed under the same circumstances would have done. [ 17 ] The evidence demonstrates that Mrs. Zelikovic fulfilled such obligation of means. She verified the information provided by the vendors of the [M...] property at the relevant time. [ 18 ] Unfortunately for the Plewa, a lien was registered on such property after the exclusive brokerage contract was signed and the listing was completed. [ 19 ] Once informed of such problem, Mrs.

Zelikovic tried to solve it. [ 20 ] Regarding the verification of titles, Alexandre Dumas in his book “ Le droit du courtage immobilier au Québec ” [9] indicated: Le courtier n’a pas à faire une recherche sur la validité des titres, mais si des indices révèlent de possibles problèmes, il doit faire des vérifications appropriées. Par ailleurs, un courtier qui ne fait qu’une vérification

sommaire du registre foncier sans noter la présence d’une hypothèque légale avec pour résultat que celle-ci est finalement découverte par le notaire instrumentant et que cela fait échouer la vente, il ne sera pas tenu responsable, car ce n’est pas lui, le professionnel spécialisé dans l’examen des titres, mais bien le notaire. Ce n’est pas au courtier de faire la recherche de titres mais bien au notaire, et c’est encore plus vrai si le vendeur a fourni au courtier des informations crédibles quant à sa qualité de propriétaire. (References omitted) [ 21 ] The mandate of Mrs.

Zelikovic was not to verify the title. [ 22 ] Furthermore, Mrs. Zelikovic indicated that at no time the vendors of the [M...] property contacted her to indicate that there was a lien on the property before the notary raised such litigious matter. [ 23 ] The Court does not find any evidence triggering the professional liability of Mrs. Zelikovic nor Re/Max. Without any proof of negligence, the analysis of the damages becomes moot.

FOR THOSE REASONS, THE COURT: DISMISSES the action of Plaintiffs Gerald Plewa and Carmela Plewa; CONDEMNS Plaintiffs Gerald Plewa and Carmela Plewa to pay to Defendants 9245-8843 Québec inc (Re/Max Action S.Z.) and Sandra Zelikovic the legal costs of $300.

__________________________________ DOMINIQUE VÉZINA, J.C.Q. Date of trial: August 14, 2018