Executive Summary: Key Legal and Evidentiary Issues

• The dispute centres on whether a municipality, acting as a private landowner, breached its obligations under article 991 of the Civil Code of Québec when it demolished a firewall shared with a neighbouring property.
   
• Testimony conflicted over whether the plaintiff's president had genuinely consented to the demolition, with the Court expressing doubt that any real choice existed.
   
• Evidence showed the City later reversed its position on what type of repair work required Council approval, causing added costs and delay for the plaintiff.
   
• Photographic and documentary evidence indicated the City benefited aesthetically from the plaintiff's exterior wall repairs facing its newly developed public park.
   
• Financial records submitted by the plaintiff detailed the additional costs incurred beyond what was covered by insurance.
   
• A separate statutory question arose as to whether the 15-day notice requirement under section 585 of the Cities and Towns Act barred the claim.

Facts of the case

9214-1233 Québec inc. owns a building at 86-88 Rue Sainte-Anne in Sainte-Anne-de-Bellevue, represented by its president, Maciek Zarzycki. In May 2019, a major fire damaged the adjacent building at 82-84 Rue Sainte-Anne, which shared a firewall with the plaintiff's property but no party wall. In early 2023, the City acquired the fire-damaged property after its former owner failed to complete repairs the City had required. In May and June 2023, the City demolished the burned building for safety reasons and removed the firewall, which had become structurally unstable due to the delayed repairs. This left the plaintiff's exterior wall bare and exposed. Discussions and email exchanges followed between the parties regarding repair or reconstruction of the now-exposed wall. The plaintiff eventually obtained a municipal permit and carried out the work, at a cost exceeding $100,000. Its insurers covered $75,000, and it claimed the remaining $15,000 from the City, alleging fault and bad faith. The City denied liability and argued the claim was inadmissible for failure to provide the 15-day notice required under section 585 of the Cities and Towns Act.

Policy and legislative provisions at issue

Article 991 of the Civil Code of Québec was central to the analysis, providing that a landowner carrying out construction or demolition must not compromise the stability of neighbouring structures. The Court applied this provision to the City in its capacity as a private landowner, distinct from its role as a municipal authority. Section 585 of the Cities and Towns Act was also at issue; it requires a claimant to give the municipal clerk written notice within 15 days of an "accident" giving rise to a claim for bodily injury (first paragraph) or property damage (second paragraph), failing which the municipality is not liable.

Reasoning and analysis

The Court found that by demolishing the firewall, the City compromised the structural integrity of the plaintiff's building, satisfying the fault requirement under article 991. It rejected the City's evidence that Mr. Zarzycki had consented to the demolition, doubting this reflected a genuine choice given the circumstances. The Court noted the City chose to build a public park rather than reconstruct on the site, leaving the plaintiff's wall permanently exposed and requiring insulation and other remedial work. An email from a City representative, Mr. Janukavicius, initially indicated that repairing the wall with matching stucco would qualify as maintenance requiring only a straightforward permit, not Council approval. The plaintiff submitted its application on that basis, but the City later determined the proposed stucco was a "new" type, reclassifying the work as a renovation requiring review by the City's Planning Advisory Committee, given also the building's location in a designated heritage-value area. The Court found no meaningful difference between the old and new stucco and characterized the City's reversal as unexplained and sudden. It further noted the City benefited aesthetically from the improved facade facing its new park, concluding the City had acted in bad faith. While accepting the plaintiff's documented additional costs, the Court reduced the award by 40%, citing that some work occurred on a wall section without a prior firewall, that the plaintiff also gained a general improvement to its building, and that depreciation for the building's age was warranted. On the second issue, the Court held that section 585 of the Cities and Towns Act did not apply, since the situation did not involve an "accident" as contemplated by either paragraph of that provision — the City's fault and bad faith as a property owner did not fit the accidental scenarios the notice requirement was designed to address.

Ruling and overall outcome

The Court partially granted the claim, finding the plaintiff successful. It ordered the City of Sainte-Anne-de-Bellevue to pay 9214-1233 Québec inc. $9,000, with legal interest and the additional indemnity under article 1619 of the Civil Code of Québec running from March 22, 2024, along with court costs of $364.