Executive Summary: Key Legal and Evidentiary Issues

• Cuisine Granite Pro sought $10,727.31 as an unpaid balance for kitchen, basement, and related renovation work.
   
• Defendants Laure Dembele and Remy Omakinda counterclaimed $9,562.90 for costs incurred to correct alleged deficiencies and finish the project.
   
• Audio evidence (Exhibit D-6) captured the contractor's representative admitting the need for major corrections during a December 17, 2021 site visit.
   
• Article 2100 of the Civil Code of Québec imposed an obligation of result on the contractor, who bore the burden of proving conforming performance.
   
• Material invoices submitted in support of a portion of the counterclaim (Exhibit D-8) were rejected for lacking probative force due to duplicates and mismatched dates.
   
• Damages for trouble and inconvenience were awarded separately from the excess-cost reimbursement, reflecting delayed use of the home.
   

Facts of the case

In 2021, Cuisine Granite Pro, through its representative Nashaat Marco, agreed to perform substantial renovation work at the Laval-area residence of Laure Dembele and Remy Omakinda, covering the kitchen, living room, and basement. The initial contract was valued at $30,828.82, with a further $2,798.49 billed for additional work and materials, bringing the total agreed cost to $33,627.31. Relations deteriorated as the homeowners identified numerous deficiencies, including poorly installed ceramic tile, poorly painted cabinets, faulty plumbing, and salvaged wood used as moulding. Marco sent another contractor, Domingo Garcia, to assess the work, and a site walkthrough took place on December 17, 2021, attended by all parties. An audio recording of that meeting showed Marco acknowledging the deficiencies and agreeing that Garcia would complete corrections at Cuisine Granite Pro's expense. Marco then left the site permanently, leaving behind a tile-cutting machine, and subsequently sent a demand letter and commenced legal proceedings without retrieving his tools. Dembele and Omakinda ultimately paid Garcia $15,500 directly to finish the renovations.

Policy and legislative provisions at issue

The dispute turned on two provisions of the Civil Code of Québec. Article 2100 imposes on a contractor an obligation of result to deliver work conforming to the contract and to accepted standards, with the burden of proving proper performance resting on the contractor. Article 1591 permits a client to withhold performance of their own obligation, here payment, where the contractor has not substantially performed its obligations. Article 1619 further governs the additional indemnity applicable to sums owed, which the Tribunal applied to the damages awarded.

Reasoning and analysis

The Tribunal found that Cuisine Granite Pro failed to discharge its burden under article 2100, relying heavily on the audio recording from the December 17, 2021 meeting, which it treated as determinative evidence that Marco had admitted the work required major correction and had delegated completion to Garcia. This admission undermined the company's position that the work was substantially finished and adequate when Marco left the site. Applying article 1591, the Tribunal held that the extent of the deficiencies and the abandonment of the project justified the homeowners' decision to withhold the disputed balance. On quantum, the Tribunal calculated that the homeowners had paid $22,900 to Cuisine Granite Pro and $15,500 to Garcia, totaling $38,400 against an originally agreed cost of $33,627.31, producing an excess expenditure of $4,772.69. A further claim for materials, supported by Exhibit D-8, was rejected because the invoices contained duplicates and dates predating the corrective work by as much as a year, undermining their reliability. The Tribunal separately recognized that the deficiencies and delays caused genuine trouble and inconvenience by postponing normal use of the home, warranting an additional award.

Ruling and overall outcome

The Tribunal dismissed the main claim brought by Cuisine Granite Pro, finding it had not performed its contractual obligations, and granted the counterclaim brought by Laure Dembele and Remy Omakinda in part. Cuisine Granite Pro was ordered to pay Dembele and Omakinda $7,272.69, comprising $4,772.69 for excess costs incurred to complete the work and $2,500 for trouble and inconvenience, with interest at the legal rate and the additional indemnity under article 1619 running from February 25, 2022. Cuisine Granite Pro was also ordered to pay court costs of $217 and $201 for the contestation and counterclaim respectively. The Tribunal additionally took note of the homeowners' offer to allow Marco to retrieve his tile-cutting machine left on their property.