Executive Summary: Key Legal and Evidentiary Issues

• Two legal actions were filed by the same plaintiff regarding commission claims under the same brokerage contract.

• The dispute involves interpretation of clauses 4.1 and 6 of a real estate brokerage contract dated June 19, 2023.

• One action is already underway in the Superior Court with a scheduled trial date in January 2027.

• The defendant requested suspension of the Québec Court matter to avoid conflicting judgments.

• The Court considered whether suspending the proceeding would cause serious prejudice to the plaintiff.

• Emphasis was placed on judicial efficiency, proportionality, and consistency between proceedings.

Facts and procedural context

Services Immobiliers Terrex Inc. filed a claim before the Cour du Québec on April 8, 2025, seeking $37,950.44 from Gestion Wilson De Sousa Inc. This claim was based on a brokerage contract entered into on June 19, 2023, under which the plaintiff was to secure tenants for the defendant’s property. The commission claimed relates to a lease signed in November 2023. However, thirteen months earlier, the same plaintiff had already initiated a separate claim in the Superior Court for a larger amount—$252,734.41—based on the same brokerage agreement, but concerning a different lease signed in August 2023 for another tenant in the same building.

Both claims raise the same legal issues, specifically regarding the interpretation of clauses 4.1 and 6 of the brokerage contract. In the Superior Court matter, trial dates had already been set for January 27 to 29, 2027. The defendant in the Cour du Québec action requested a suspension of proceedings to avoid duplicative litigation and potentially contradictory judgments. The plaintiff opposed this request, arguing that a suspension would delay its ability to enforce its rights and that different brokers were involved in the two cases.

Court’s analysis and decision

The Court analyzed the request for suspension under article 212 of the Code of Civil Procedure, which allows for suspension when two actions involve the same legal or factual basis, provided that no serious prejudice results. The Court found that both cases concerned the same legal foundation and the same contract, differing only in the lease transactions and brokers involved.

The judge emphasized that the interpretation to be made by the Superior Court regarding the contractual clauses would directly impact the outcome of the Cour du Québec case. Allowing both to proceed in parallel risked conflicting decisions. The Court also noted that no serious prejudice to the plaintiff had been demonstrated, aside from procedural delay, and that the principle of proportionality and sound case management supported a stay.

The motion for suspension was granted. The Cour du Québec proceeding was suspended until final judgment is rendered in the Superior Court matter and becomes res judicata. Costs were awarded in the usual course.