Executive Summary: Key Legal and Evidentiary Issues

• Placement Santé Prestige inc. sought retraction of a default judgment rendered on March 12, 2026, arguing it received the hearing notice too late due to postal delays.
• Central to the dispute was whether 9462-5621 Québec inc. breached a written one-year advertising contract by removing the client's signage approximately four months before the agreed end date.
• At issue was whether the original written contract had been validly modified by an alleged verbal agreement to shorten its duration in exchange for the use of a newer vehicle.
• Under Article 2863 of the Civil Code of Québec, testimonial evidence alone is insufficient to contradict or modify the terms of a clear and complete written contract absent a commencement of proof.
• The court found that removing the advertising before the contractual term expired, without the client's consent and without a valid modification, constituted a fault engaging civil liability under Article 1458 C.c.Q.
• Moral damages claimed for stress and fatigue were denied, as those grievances related to the client's representative rather than the client itself, and no bad faith or abuse of process was established.

Facts of the case

Placement Santé Prestige inc. (the "Client") entered into a written contract with 9462-5621 Québec inc. (the "Service Provider") on August 31, 2023, for the placement of advertising on a taxi for a fixed term of one year. The advertising was installed in November 2023 but was removed on July 11, 2024 — before the contractual term had expired — leaving approximately four months of the agreed service undelivered. The Client did not consent to the early removal. A first hearing was held on March 12, 2026, in the Client's absence, and its claim was dismissed. The Client subsequently sought retraction of that judgment, stating it only received the hearing notice around March 20, 2026 — after the hearing had already taken place — due to postal delays. The notice had been mailed on January 26, 2026, 45 days before the hearing date.

Contractual terms at issue

The document at the center of the dispute, titled "Facture emplacement publicitaire" and signed by both parties on August 31, 2023, was treated by the court as a service contract within the meaning of Articles 2098 and following of the Civil Code of Québec. It expressly provided for a one-year duration and set out the applicable financial terms. The total contract price was $4,599.00, spread over 12 months. The Service Provider argued that the original contract had been verbally modified: in exchange for using a newer vehicle, the parties allegedly agreed to shorten the contract to approximately eight months. The Client denied any such modification.

Court's reasoning and analysis

The court first addressed the retraction application. While the registry had technically complied with procedural requirements by mailing the notice 45 days before the hearing — meeting the minimum six-week requirement under Article 554 C.p.c. — the court found that formal compliance alone was not determinative. The Client testified consistently that she received the notice only after the hearing had taken place and acted promptly upon receipt. No evidence of negligence or bad faith was found on her part, and the underlying claim raised substantive issues warranting a full hearing. The retraction was accordingly granted.

On the merits, the court turned to whether the written contract had been validly modified. Under Article 2863 C.c.Q., parties to a written juridical act may not contradict or modify its terms by testimony unless there is a commencement of proof — such as an admission, a writing from the opposing party, or a material element rendering the alleged fact plausible. The court found no such commencement of proof. The Service Provider relied solely on testimony, which is insufficient to override a clear and complete written contract. The court also rejected the argument that the use of a newer vehicle constituted consideration for a shorter contract term: the vehicle change was initiated by the Service Provider and no evidence was adduced showing that advertising on a newer vehicle offered superior value. The alleged verbal modification was therefore inadmissible and could not be given effect.

Having rejected the modification claim, the court assessed the Service Provider's conduct against the original written contract. The advertising was removed on July 11, 2024, while the one-year term had not yet expired, leaving approximately four months of unperformed service. The Service Provider did not dispute the early removal; it maintained only that the removal was consistent with the alleged verbal modification — a position the court had already rejected. The premature removal without the Client's consent and without a valid contractual modification was held to constitute a fault engaging the Service Provider's civil liability under Article 1458 C.c.Q., which provides that every person has a duty to honour their contractual commitments and is liable for the injury caused by a failure to do so.

Ruling and overall outcome

The court ordered the retraction of the March 12, 2026 judgment and allowed the Client's claim in part. On the quantum of damages, the Client was awarded $1,533.00 for the unperformed portion of the contract — calculated as four months of the $4,599.00 total contract price spread over 12 months — and $112.12 in postal expenses incurred in pursuing the claim, for a total of $1,645.12. The $988.79 cost of vehicle lettering was denied, as the contract expressly placed that expense on the Client regardless of whether the contract was fully performed. The $1,000.00 claimed for moral damages was also denied: the stress and fatigue described related to the Client's representative, who was not a party to the proceedings, and no bad faith or abuse of process by the Service Provider was established. Court costs of $182.00 were additionally ordered against the Service Provider. Placement Santé Prestige inc. was the successful party, with 9462-5621 Québec inc. condemned to pay a total of $1,645.12, plus interest at the legal rate and the additional indemnity under Article 1619 C.c.Q. from April 27, 2024 (the date of the formal demand), along with $182.00 in court costs.