Executive Summary: Key Legal and Evidentiary Issues

• Plaintiff sought payment for trucking services rendered to defendant's logistics division over a six-month period.
   
• Defendant admitted owing a specific sum for services but disputed the remainder of the claim.
   
• Insufficient documentary evidence, namely illegible trip sheets and no invoices, undermined plaintiff's ability to prove the higher amount claimed.
   
• Quebec's Civil Code provisions on burden of proof and direct, foreseeable damages barred recovery of the unproven portion of the claim.
   
• Defendant's counterclaim failed for lack of evidence on both fault and damages.
   
• Judgment granted plaintiff's claim in part, with legal interest, indemnity, and costs.
   

Facts of the case

9470-6660 Québec Inc. rendered trucking services to 7638477 Canada Inc., which operates under the name SH Logistics ("SH"), from December 2024 to May 2025. At trial, the parties' names were amended to reflect that they had not contracted in their personal capacities, but as the companies described above. SH admitted, through the testimony of its vice-president Gurtejpal Singh Shergill and its accountant/controller Cornelius Christian, along with exhibit D-1, that it owed the plaintiff $10,711.40. The plaintiff claimed a higher amount of $13,500.00 for its services but did not file invoices in support; it relied only on "Trip Sheets," which the Court found were, in part, illegible. SH also raised a counterclaim against the plaintiff, and separately argued that the plaintiff's documents lacked GST and QST registration numbers.

Policy and legislative provisions at issue

The Court applied several provisions of the Civil Code of Québec. Sections 2803 and 2804 C.C.Q., governing the burden of proof and the evidentiary weight of documents, were central to the Court's finding that the plaintiff had not proven the portion of its claim beyond the admitted amount. Sections 1607 and 1613 C.C.Q., which limit recoverable damages to those that are direct and foreseeable, were applied to deny the unproven remainder of the claim. Sections 1375 and 1458 C.C.Q., addressing good faith and the binding force of contractual obligations, supported the finding that SH owed the admitted amount for services rendered at its request and for its benefit. Section 1619 C.C.Q., concerning the additional indemnity on sums owed, was applied to the amount awarded.

Reasoning and analysis

The Court found that SH's admission of the $10,711.40 debt, corroborated by witness testimony and documentary evidence, established liability for that amount. By contrast, the plaintiff failed to substantiate the additional $2,788.60 it sought, since the trip sheets it filed were partly illegible and no invoices were produced. Under sections 2803 and 2804 C.C.Q., this evidentiary gap meant the burden of proof had not been met for the unproven portion. The Court also held that the remainder of the claim did not qualify as direct and foreseeable damages under sections 1607 and 1613 C.C.Q., providing an independent basis to deny it. SH's argument concerning the absence of GST and QST numbers on the plaintiff's documents was dismissed as irrelevant to the Court's determination. Turning to the counterclaim, the Court denied it outright, finding that SH had not produced the witnesses necessary to establish either fault or damages.

Ruling and overall outcome

The Court granted the plaintiff's claim in part, condemning 7638477 Canada Inc. to pay 9470-6660 Québec Inc. the sum of $10,711.40, plus legal interest and the additional indemnity under section 1619 C.C.Q., along with legal costs. The defendant's counterclaim was dismissed in its entirety.