Executive Summary: Key Legal and Evidentiary Issues

• Vues d'Afrique relocated Malika Slimani's paintings without her authorization after a collective exhibition, giving rise to a civil liability claim under the deposit provisions of the Civil Code of Québec.
• Central to the dispute was whether the deposit was gratuitous or onerous, as this determination governed the applicable standard of liability.
• Contested facts included the number of paintings entrusted to Vues d'Afrique, with Slimani claiming nine and the defendants asserting only three were deposited.
• Credibility was decisive, as Bousmaha Seddiki's contradictory statements — particularly regarding insurance proceedings and a subsequent invitation to an exhibition for affected artists — undermined the defendants' version of events.
• Personal liability of Seddiki turned on whether his actions fell within the scope of his duties as a representative of Vues d'Afrique rather than constituting an independent extracontractual fault.
• Proof of the value of the damaged photographs was insufficient, resulting in rejection of that portion of the claim.

Facts of the case

Malika Slimani is a visual artist who was invited to participate in a collective exhibition organized by Vues d'Afrique, a non-profit organization whose mission is to promote artistic and literary productions relating to Africa. Bousmaha Seddiki, the exhibitions commissioner at Vues d'Afrique, organized the exhibition, which was held at the Centre St-Pierre in Montréal. Initially scheduled from March 4 to 30, 2023, the exhibition was subsequently extended by one month. Slimani brought nine paintings to the exhibition, as documented on three participation forms she completed at Seddiki's request, each listing three works along with their dimensions and prices.

At the end of the exhibition, Slimani attended the Centre St-Pierre with her partner to retrieve her works, only to find the premises closed. She then learned that Seddiki had transported her paintings, without her authorization, to Vues d'Afrique's own premises in order to vacate the exhibition space. On May 23, 2023, a fire broke out in premises located above those of Vues d'Afrique, causing significant water damage. Slimani maintains that her nine paintings were destroyed as a result. She also alleged that photographs she had entrusted to Vues d'Afrique for a separate photography exhibition were damaged by the water. Slimani claimed $15,000 in total, representing both material and moral damages arising from these losses.

Applicable legal framework

The case was governed by the deposit provisions of the Civil Code of Québec. Article 2280 defines a deposit as a contract by which a person (the depositor) remits movable property to another (the depositary), who undertakes to keep it for a certain time and return it. Article 2283 requires the depositary to act with prudence and diligence and prohibits use of the property without the depositor's permission. Article 2286 obliges the depositary to return the very thing deposited. Article 2289 provides that in a gratuitous deposit, the depositary is liable for loss caused by their fault, while in an onerous deposit, the depositary bears liability for the loss unless force majeure is established. Article 2290 permits the court to reduce damages in a gratuitous deposit where the depositor failed to declare the nature or value of the property.

Reasoning and analysis

The court first determined the nature of the deposit. Seddiki and Vues d'Afrique's secretary of the board, Madame Gagné, both testified that the full proceeds of any artwork sale were remitted to the artist, with no commission retained by Vues d'Afrique. The participation forms confirmed that no commission was provided for. The court found that Vues d'Afrique had established on a balance of probabilities that it derived no revenue from the exhibition sales, consistent with its non-profit mandate, and accordingly characterized the deposit as gratuitous.

On the number of paintings, the evidence was contradictory. Seddiki acknowledged only three works — titled "Rêve," "Mirage," and "Ciel oriental" — which were visible in event photographs. However, Slimani's three participation forms listed nine distinct works in total, and her testimony was corroborated by her son, who confirmed all nine were present at the exhibition. The court also noted that Vues d'Afrique's attempt to show that Slimani had exhibited the same works at subsequent exhibitions failed, as the catalogues produced showed different works — an outcome that damaged Seddiki's credibility rather than Slimani's. The court accepted Slimani's evidence and found that nine paintings had been entrusted to Vues d'Afrique.

On the question of fault, Seddiki ultimately admitted he did not obtain Slimani's permission before moving the works. He claimed to have contacted her by phone and email requesting she retrieve them, but produced no supporting emails. Slimani and another artist both testified they had received no prior notice and had not authorized the transfer. The court accepted this version of events. Seddiki's credibility was further undermined by his conduct after the fire: he informed Slimani that insurance proceedings were underway — a position inconsistent with his claim that the works had already been retrieved before the incident. He also subsequently invited her to an exhibition for artists affected by the disaster, which was equally incompatible with his position. The court concluded that Vues d'Afrique moved the paintings without right and without notifying Slimani, and that this fault caused the loss.

Regarding the value of the nine paintings, Seddiki did not dispute the value of the three works he acknowledged, totalling $1,450. The remaining six works were valued at $4,650 by Slimani, consistent with the prices listed on the participation forms and uncontested by any defence evidence. The court therefore accepted a total material loss of $6,150. Slimani's additional claim of $6,358.02 for moral damages and time spent creating the works was rejected on the basis that it would constitute double compensation for the same loss already covered by the material award.

On the photographs, Vues d'Afrique acknowledged that five of the photographs were damaged but disputed their value. Slimani had incurred $91.98 in printing costs and estimated the photographs' value at $2,400. The court found this evidence insufficient to establish the claimed value and rejected that portion of the claim entirely.

On Seddiki's personal liability, the court found that at all material times he acted within the scope of his duties as a representative of Vues d'Afrique. No separate fault distinct from that attributable to the organization was established, and his personal liability was not engaged.

Ruling and overall outcome

The Honourable Emmanuelle Saucier, J.C.Q., of the Court of Québec (Small Claims Division) partially allowed the claim on June 3, 2026. Vues d'Afrique was ordered to pay Malika Slimani $6,150 in damages for the loss of her nine paintings, plus interest at the legal rate and the additional indemnity under article 1619 of the Civil Code of Québec, running from June 2, 2025, together with court costs of $237. The claim against Bousmaha Seddiki personally was dismissed without costs. The claims for moral damages and for the value of the photographs were both rejected.