FALL 2020

HOMEWORK 1

CLASS

99322

Course Title : Laws and Treaties

STUDY AND ANALYSIS OF A LEGAL CASE

Sadiki v. Greyhound 2013 QCCQ 12371

JT1284

COURT OF QUEBEC

"Small Claims Division"(under $ 15000)

UNDER THE CHAIR: THE HONORABLE PATRICK THROUX, J.C.Q.

______________________________________________________________________

YANNICK SADIKI, domiciled and resident at [...], G, Quebec, [...],

Plaintiff

V.

GREYHOUND boul. International, Suite , Burlington, Ontario

Defendant.

______________________________________________________________________

FACTS:

The defendant (GREYHOUND) operates a commercial business for the transportation of persons and goods;

The plaintiff (YANNICK SADIKI), entrusted the defendant with a suitcase to be transported from Fort McMurray, Alberta to Magog, Quebec;

That bag never arrived at its destination and, despite all the steps taken by the plaintiff, the defendant was not able to find it;

This suitcase contained clothing and work tools of the plaintiff working in the field of tree planting;

The loss of these goods and effects represents, for the plaintiff, a loss of the order of $ 760 as claimed.

JUDGMENT

______________________________________________________________________

[1] CONSIDERING the plaintiff's claim for $ 760 in damages to compensate for the loss of his property and personal effects carried by the defendant;

[2] CONSIDERING the failure of the defendant to respond, within the legal deadlines, to the judicial request which was notified to him on March 21, 2013;

[3] CONSIDERING the evidence and representations of the plaintiff;

[4] WHEREAS the defendant operates a commercial business for the transportation of persons and goods;

[5] WHEREAS the plaintiff has entrusted the defendant with a suitcase to be transported from Fort McMurray in Alberta to Magog in Quebec;

[6] CONSIDERING that this bag has never arrived at its destination and that, despite all the steps taken by the plaintiff, the defendant has not been able to locate it;

[7] CONSIDERING that this suitcase contained clothing and work tools of the applicant who works in the field of tree planting;

[8] WHEREAS the loss of these goods and effects represents, for the plaintiff, a loss of the order of $ 760 as claimed;

[9] CONSIDERING the provisions of articles 2030, 2040 and 2049 of the Civil Code of Quebec (C.c.Q.), which states as follows:

2030. A contract of carriage is a contract by which one person, the carrier, undertakes principally to carry a person or property from one place to another, in return for a price which another person, the passenger or the shipper or receiver of the property, undertakes to pay at the agreed time

2040. Carriage of property extends from the time the carrier receives the property into his charge for carriage until its delivery

2049. The carrier is bound to carry the property to its destination.

He is bound to make reparation for injury resulting from the carriage, unless he proves that

the loss was caused by superior force, an inherent defect in the property or natural shrinkage

[10] FOR THESE REASONS, the Tribunal:

[11] ACCEPTED the request;

[12] CONDEMNS Defendant Greyhound to pay the plaintiff the sum of SEVEN

HUNDRED SIXTY DOLLARS ($ 760) with interest at the legal rate and the

additional indemnity provided for in article 1619 of the Civil Code of Qubec as

from the remainder (the warning)*of October 4, 2012, PLUS the fees of

SEVENTY ONE DOLLARS AND SEVENTY-FIVE CENTS ($ 71.75)

__________________________________

PATRICK THROUX, J.C.Q. (the judge)*

*Added by the teacher.

*Added by the teacher.

QUESTIONS. (Please answer in the space allocated for this purpose.)

QUESTION 1: WHAT IS THE LEGAL FRAMEWORK OF THE RELATIONSHIP THAT APPLIES TO THIS CASE? (1POINT)

QUESTION 2: WHAT WAS THE OBLIGATION(S) OF EACH PARTY (ACCORDING TO THE PRECISE PROVISIONS OF THE CIVIL CODE OF QUEBEC)? (2 POINTS)

QUESTION 3: ON WHAT ARTICLES OF LAW (C.C.Q) THE COURT (JUDGE) REFERRED TO WRITE HIS DECISION (JUDGMENT)?(2 POINTS)

QUESTION 4: WITH YOUR OWN WORDS WRITE A SUMMARY OF THE REASONING OF THE JUDGE TO REACH TO HIS DECISION? (ACCORDING TO THE PRECISE ARTICLES OF THE C.C.Q) (2 POINTS)

QUESTION 5: ACCORDING TO YOU, WAS THE JUDGE FAIR IN HIS DECISION AND WHY (BASED ON PRECISE PROVISIONS OF THE C.C.Q)? (2 POINTS)

CASE II

Jack buys a ticket to catch the bus to New York. He also buys two bags to put his personal belongings.

He gives the big bag to the driver of the bus to drop it in the lower part of the vehicle with the other bags of other passengers. He kept the small suitcase with him because he kept cash and identity cards in this bag and he wanted to leave it under his close watch.

Once in New York, he realizes that his little suitcase has disappeared.

In panic he ran to the driver to ask to help him find his small suitcase because, according to Jack, the bus driver is responsible for the loss of his bag. The driver goes with Jack to the bus section where the big bags were dropped, he asked Jack to pick up his big suitcase and once it's recovered, he tells him that he cannot do anything for the other lost suitcase.

Furious, Jack threatens to prosecute him and his company in Justice.

6- DESCRIBE THE LEGAL FRAMEWORK OF THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN JACK AND THE BUS DRIVER. (1 point)

7- WHAT ARE THE LEGAL PROVISIONS (ARTICLES OF THE CCQ) THAT GOVERN THIS RELATIONSHIP AND IN PARTICULAR, WHICH GOVERN THE HIGHLIGHTS AND RELEVANT FACTS OF THIS STORY? (LINK BETWEEN THE FACTS AND THE ARTICLES OF LAW)

(3 POINTS)

8- BASED ON THESE LEGAL PROVISIONS, CAN YOU PREDICT WHO WILL WIN IN THE EVENT OF A COMPLAINT IN COURTS, LODGED BY JACK AGAINST THE DRIVER OF THE BUS AND HIS COMPANY? (2 POINTS)