Executive Summary: Key Legal and Evidentiary Issues

• Because the defendant filed no contestation, the claim proceeded by default under article 559 of the Code of Civil Procedure.
   
• The plaintiffs bore the burden of proving their claim on a preponderance of evidence under articles 2803 and 2804 of the Civil Code of Québec.
   
• Uncontradicted evidence established that a verbal contract for services for excavation work was formed in May 2025.
   
• Article 2125 of the Civil Code of Québec gave the plaintiffs the right to resiliate the contract, which they did a few days later when only three hours of site preparation had been performed.
   
• No claim was presented by the defendant under article 2129 for the value of work performed or injury suffered, and the plaintiffs were found entitled to reimbursement of the $5,000 deposit.
   
• Legal fees of $3,000 were refused as indirect damages, since awarding them would conflict with the principle of no lawyer representation in the Small Claims Division.
   

Facts of the case

In May 2025, Athinoula Toka Koutsis and Nicolas Koutsis hired Pave Uni et Excavation GRJ inc. to carry out excavation work on their property. After paying a $5,000 deposit, they told the company they were ending the contract because of financial complications related to the sale of a property. The company refused to refund the deposit despite a formal notice letter dated August 28, 2025, which was served by bailiffs on September 5, 2025. The plaintiffs sued for the deposit plus $3,000 in legal fees incurred to assert their rights. No contestation was filed by the company, so the case proceeded by default in its absence.

Policy and legislative provisions at issue

The contract for services was concluded verbally in May 2025, and the decision does not refer to any specific contractual clauses. The court relied on provisions of the Civil Code of Québec. Under article 2125, it found that the plaintiffs had the right to resiliate the contract. Article 2129 was cited as the basis for a claim relating to the value of work performed or injury suffered, which the defendant never presented. Articles 2803 and 2804 placed the burden of proof on the plaintiffs, and article 1619 governed the additional indemnity added to interest. On the procedural side, article 559 of the Code of Civil Procedure allowed the matter to proceed by default.

Reasoning and analysis

The court relied on the proceedings and exhibits in the record, the plaintiffs' testimony, which it found credible, and the absence of any defence evidence. It found that the plaintiffs had paid a total of $5,000 as a deposit and resiliated the contract a few days later, when the defendant had performed only three hours of site preparation. Since article 2125 entitled the plaintiffs to resiliate, and the defendant presented no claim under article 2129 for the value of its work or any injury suffered, the plaintiffs were justified in claiming reimbursement of the $5,000 deposit. Their claim for $3,000 in legal fees failed. Such fees are indirect damages that a party generally cannot recover, save for exceptions. The court also held that, from an access-to-justice perspective, awarding lawyers' fees would run contrary to the principle that parties in the Small Claims Division are not represented by lawyers. For that point it cited Léveillé c. Peratsakis, 2021 QCCQ 5911, and Boulay c. Lavoie, 2017 QCCQ 2485.

Ruling and overall outcome

The court granted the application in part, finding in favour of Athinoula Toka Koutsis and Nicolas Koutsis. Pave Uni et Excavation GRJ inc. was ordered to pay them $5,000, with interest at the legal rate and the additional indemnity under article 1619 of the Civil Code of Québec from September 16, 2025, following the expiry of the 10-day period set out in the formal notice. The defendant must also pay $219 in legal costs. The $3,000 claimed for legal fees was not awarded, and the decision does not quantify the interest and additional indemnity.