Executive Summary: Key Legal and Evidentiary Issues

• Double billing of a one-night hotel stay on the plaintiff’s AMEX card led to a small claims action seeking $3,576.92.
   
• Restaurant charges of $116.59 were withdrawn at the hearing after the credit card issuer refunded them.
   
• Although the hotel filed a written contestation, it did not appear at the hearing, so the court proceeded in its absence and issued a default judgment.
   
• Credible testimony from the plaintiff, together with the preponderant and uncontradicted evidence, established an overcharge of $229.95.
   
• Bad faith and negligence in failing to act on the plaintiff’s repeated follow-ups supported a discretionary global award of $500 for lost time, trouble and inconvenience.
   
• Lawyer’s fees of $1,595.76 were refused as indirect damages whose recovery would conflict with the no-lawyer principle of the Small Claims Division.
   

Facts of the case

After staying one night at the Hôtel du Lac Carling in February 2024, Ahmed Koné found that his AMEX credit card statement showed duplicate charges for both his accommodation and his meals. He followed up several times with the defendant, Hôtel et Centre de Villégiature du Lac Carling inc., but it refused and neglected to reimburse the overcharged amounts. Koné then sued in the Small Claims Division of the Court of Québec for $3,576.92. His claim was made up of $229.95 for the double-billed night, $116.59 for double-billed restaurant charges, $1,634.62 for one week of lost salary and $1,595.76 in legal fees. By the time of the hearing, his credit card issuer had refunded the restaurant charges, and he withdrew that part of the claim. The hotel filed a contestation but did not attend the hearing, despite being duly summoned and called.

Policy and legislative provisions at issue

The decision does not discuss any contractual clauses. Under articles 2803 and 2804 of the Civil Code of Québec, Koné, as plaintiff, bore the burden of proving the facts supporting his claim on a balance of probabilities. Article 559 of the Code of Civil Procedure allowed the court to hear the case in the hotel’s absence. The award carries interest at the legal rate and the additional indemnity provided for in article 1619 of the Civil Code of Québec. In addressing the legal fees claim, the court relied on the principle that parties are not represented by lawyers in the Small Claims Division.

Reasoning and analysis

The court relied on the proceedings and exhibits in the record, Koné’s credible testimony and the absence of any defence evidence. On that basis, it found that the preponderant and uncontradicted evidence showed the hotel had overcharged $229.95 to his card. It further found that the hotel acted in bad faith and negligently by failing to act on his claim despite repeated follow-ups, which forced him to go to court to assert his rights. Exercising its discretion, the court granted a global amount of $500 to compensate Koné for all the prejudice he suffered for loss of time, trouble, annoyance and inconvenience. The decision does not separately rule on the $1,634.62 lost salary claim. On legal fees, the court held that these are indirect damages a party generally cannot claim, save in exceptional cases. It added that awarding Koné his lawyer’s fees would, from an access-to-justice perspective, run counter to the no-lawyer principle of the Small Claims Division, citing Léveillé c. Peratsakis, 2021 QCCQ 5911, and Boulay c. Lavoie, 2017 QCCQ 2485.

Ruling and overall outcome

The court ruled orally from the bench on September 21, 2026, partially granting Koné’s claim in a default judgment. Hôtel et Centre de Villégiature du Lac Carling inc. was ordered to pay Koné $729.95, with interest at the legal rate and the additional indemnity under article 1619 of the Civil Code of Québec from the date of service, plus $115 in court costs. The claim for lawyer’s fees was refused, and the decision makes no separate award for lost salary.