Executive Summary: Key Legal and Evidentiary Issues

• Contractual civil liability under article 1458 C.c.Q. was the legal foundation of the claim against the builder.
• Plaintiffs bore the burden of proving fault, damages, and causation on a balance of probabilities (articles 2803–2804 C.c.Q.).
• Delays of more than nine months in installing the exterior cladding were admitted by the defendant's own witness.
• Evidence of water infiltration, mold, vermin, and damaged materials supported the finding of fault.
• Hypothetical future damages to the structure were rejected for lack of any supporting evidence.
• Two months of the delay-related claims were deducted due to the COVID-19 lockdown imposed on March 13, 2020.

Facts of the case

Yves Despatis and his spouse, Mariane Bouchard, signed a contract with Maison Laprise inc. on March 30, 2018 for the construction of their home on a shared-task basis. They alleged damages exceeding $30,000 but reduced their claim to $15,000 to fall within the jurisdiction of the Small Claims Division of the Court of Québec, District of Laval. At signing, it was agreed that Laprise would complete all of its work by the fall of 2019, before the winter of 2019–2020. Instead, for lack of a subcontractor, Laprise did not finish installing the exterior cladding until July 2020 — more than nine months after the agreed date — and its work overall stretched to April 2021, with the entire project lasting two years. Left without cladding through the fall and winter, the house suffered water infiltration with apparent mold, vermin in the attic, and deterioration of the roof parapet membrane due to prolonged exposure without flashing. Interior finishing materials delivered well ahead of time, including interior partitions measuring 10 feet high by 9 feet wide, sat on the property for nearly a month and were damaged. The couple moved in as planned in November 2019 despite the missing cladding, spending many sleepless nights due to the Tyvek paper flapping in the wind, and Ms. Bouchard temporarily moved out when vermin was discovered in the attic. Mr. Despatis also described significant stress and undergoing several medical tests during the winter of 2020 following a sudden, abnormal weight loss. A major water infiltration reported in July 2020 was only corrected in April 2021.

Contractual obligations at issue

Under the contract, Laprise was required to supply the materials for the frame, the insulation, and the interior and exterior finishes, and was responsible for installing the frame and the exterior finish. The claim rested on article 1458 C.c.Q., which provides that every person has a duty to honour their contractual undertakings and, on failing that duty, is liable for the bodily, moral, or material injury caused to the other contracting party and bound to make reparation for it. The plaintiffs' claim comprised four heads of damages: $2,608 in excess interest paid, $1,500 in higher insurance expenses, $5,000 for premature deterioration of the frame and possible future problems, and $5,900 for loss of enjoyment and stress.

The court's reasoning and analysis

Judge Johanne Gagnon noted that the plaintiffs had to establish fault, damages, and a causal link by a preponderance of evidence. Mr. Despatis testified calmly and sincerely, with coherence, assurance, and precision, and mastered his file. Laprise's witness, Annie Girard, its construction director for barely a month, had knowledge of the file limited to information on Laprise's platform; she acknowledged the delays described by Mr. Despatis, admitted coordination was not optimal essentially because of the difficulty finding an exterior-cladding subcontractor, and confirmed the water infiltrations, while stating they had all been investigated and corrected and that Laprise never abandoned the site, having completed its work by August 6, 2021, when it sent the couple a demand letter for the balance owing. The Tribunal concluded that fault by Laprise was established on a preponderance of the evidence. On quantum, Laprise did not contest the documentary evidence for the interest and insurance claims but argued that the Québec government's COVID-19 lockdown of March 13, 2020 caused part of the delay; the Tribunal agreed and deducted two months from those claims, allowing $1,860 for excess interest over 7 months and $1,167 for higher insurance over 7 months. The $5,000 claim for premature deterioration of the frame was dismissed as purely hypothetical damages unsupported by any evidence. As for loss of enjoyment and stress, the Tribunal rejected Ms. Girard's suggestion that the couple simply had to accept the ordinary stress of a construction project — noting this was Mr. Despatis's fifth self-build experience and nothing similar had occurred before — and, exercising its discretion, awarded $4,000.

Ruling and outcome

The claim was allowed in part in favour of Mr. Despatis and Ms. Bouchard. Maison Laprise inc. was ordered to pay them $7,027, plus interest at the legal rate together with the additional indemnity provided by law from August 17, 2021, as well as legal costs limited to the court filing fees they paid, namely $211.