Facebook Twitter LinkedIn YouTube Nous joindre | English

Décision

Les décisions diffusées proviennent de tribunaux ou d'organismes indépendants de SOQUIJ et pourraient ne pas être accessibles aux personnes handicapées qui utilisent des technologies d'adaptation. Visitez la page Accessibilité pour en savoir plus.
Copier l'url dans le presse-papier
Le lien a été copié dans le presse-papier
_

3311066 Canada inc. (Marina Centre) c. Massé

2011 QCCA 1360

 

COURT OF APPEAL

 

CANADA

PROVINCE OF QUEBEC

REGISTRY OF MONTREAL

 

No:

500-09-021823-117

 

(500-17-037108-076)

 

 

MINUTES OF THE HEARING

 

 

DATE:

July 13, 2011

 

 

THE HONOURABLE MARIE-FRANCE BICH, J.A.

 

PETITIONERS

ATTORNEY(S)

3311066 CANADA INC. (D/B/A "MARINA CENTRE")

AND

VINCENZO BARRASSO

Mtre Danielle Oiknine

OIKNINE & ASSOCIÉS

 

 

RESPONDENT(S)

ATTORNEY(S)

NORMAND MASSÉ

Mtre Olivier J. Brault

ALLALI AVOCATS

 

 

 

ATTORNEY(S)

 

 

 

 

MOTION FOR SUSPENSION OF PROVISIONAL EXECUTION

 

 

Clerk: Marc Leblanc

Courtroom:  RC.18

 


 

 

HEARING

 

 

16 h 33 Beginning of the hearing.

16 h 33 Argument of Mtre Oiknine.

16 h 52 Argument of Mtre Brault.

17 h 00 Reply by Mtre Oiknine.

17 h 04 Suspension of the hearing.

17 h 20 Resumption of the hearing.

Judgment rendered - see page 3.

17 h 25 The hearing is concluded.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Marc Leblanc

Clerk

 


 

 

JUDGMENT

 

 

[1]          On June 28, 2011, the Superior Court, district de Montréal (Mr. Justice Paul Mayer), rendered the following judgment :

FOR THESE REASONS, THE COURT:

[245]    GRANTS the Requête introductive d'instance ré-amendée of the Plaintiff in part;

[246]    ACKNOWLEDGES the Defendants' discontinuance of their counterclaim, WITH COSTS against the Defendants;

[247]    ORDERS the resiliation of the Lease as of June 30, 2007;

[248]    CONDEMNS 3311066 Canada inc. and Vincenzo Barrasso, solidarily, to pay the Plaintiff the sum of $273,450 to compensate him for lost profits, the whole with interest at the legal rate, plus the additional indemnity provided for pursuant to Article 1619 C.C.Q. as of June 5, 2007;

[249]    CONDEMNS 3311066 Canada Inc. and Vincenzo Barrasso, solidarily, to pay the Plaintiff the following:

            $25,000 of punitive damages; and

            $70,020.33 for extrajudicial fees;

            the whole with interest at the legal rate, plus the additional indemnity provided for pursuant to Article 1619 C.C.Q. as of the date of this judgment;

[250]    ORDERS the provisional execution of the sum of $275,000 awarded herein notwithstanding appeal pursuant to Article 547 C.C.P.;

[251]    WITH COSTS against the Defendants.

[2]          The petitioners have appealed this judgment, by way of inscription, and they now seek the suspension of the order for provisional execution, pursuant to article 550 C.C.P.

[3]          Their motion shall be dismissed.

[4]          The conditions for the suspension of the provisional execution of a judgment are well known. Such suspension will be granted when there are major and apparent weaknesses in the judgment appealed from, and when provisional execution is of such a nature as to cause great or irreparable harm to the requesting party, with due consideration to the balance of inconvenience[1]. By exception, in some circumstances, the possibility of an irreparable and disproportionate harm, which would entirely neutralize the appeal, may, in and of itself, justify the suspension of  provisional execution[2].

[5]          The petitioners' motion does not fulfill these conditions. Although the inscription in appeal is 30 pages long and states numerous grounds of appeal, some of which are reiterated forcefully in the motion, it is impossible to conclude that there are major and flagrant weaknesses in the judgment, which is very detailed and carefully reasoned. Some of the judge's statements may, perhaps, merit some further examination by this Court, but that is not sufficient for the purposes of suspending provisional execution.

[6]          Neither have the petitioners established that provisional execution will cause them irreparable harm or that it would neutralize their appeal.

[7]          The trial judge, who is vested with a considerable discretionary power in these matters, under art. 547 , second para., C.C.P., convincingly explained his decision to order provisional execution and his reasons are in accordance with the judgment of our Court in Lebeuf c. Groupe S.N.C.-Lavalin inc., [1995] R.D.J. 366 (C.A.), and the applicable caselaw.

[8]          For these reasons, the motion IS DISMISSED, with costs.

 

 

 

 

MARIE-FRANCE BICH, J.A.

 

 



[1]     See : English Montreal School Board c. Boyle, 2005 QCCA 657 , SOQUIJ AZ-50321872 , J.E. 2005-1343 , para. 18 and cases cited therein; Mont-Tremblant Residence Trust c. Chartier, 2011 QCCA 1003 .

[2]     See : Konarsky c. Gornitsky, 2010 qcca 1291 , J.e. 2010-1265.

AVIS :
Le lecteur doit s'assurer que les décisions consultées sont finales et sans appel; la consultation du plumitif s'avère une précaution utile.

© Société québécoise d'information juridique (SOQUIJ) - Tous droits réservés  |  SOQUIJ est une société qui relève du ministre de la Justice du Québec