CANADA Trends and Developments Contributed by: Anthony Franceschini, INF LLP
9365 - 6502 Québec inc . v Nissan Canada inc ., 2026 QCCQ 35 On 31 May 2022, 9365-6502 Québec inc. (9365), a corporation, together with Peter Skierka, signed a long-term lease for an Infiniti QX50 with a Nissan-affil - iated dealership. Following a series of visits to Infiniti dealerships between June 2022 and March 2024, Mr Skierka sent Nissan Canada inc. a letter on 30 March 2024 denouncing the alleged unresolved problems with his vehicle and demanding a cancellation of the lease. Nissan requested an inspection of the vehicle, which Mr Skierka refused. He subsequently signed a new lease for a BMW and returned the Infiniti to the BMW dealership before the lease term. The plaintiffs then claimed CAD14,517.97 from Nissan, comprising of the early termination penalty, three months of lease payments, and CAD2,500 in moral damages. The Court of Québec’s Small Claims Division dis - missed the claim on a preliminary ground that the CPA was not applicable to the contract because one of the lessees was a corporation (9365), and it was 9365, not Mr Skierka, that made the lease payments. The CPA defines a consumer as a natural person who acquires goods or services for purposes other than commercial ones. Since a corporation cannot qualify as a consumer under the statute, and since the finan - cial obligations were borne by 9365, the CPA’s protec - tions did not apply to the transaction. Furthermore, turning to the general provisions of the Civil Code of Québec, the Court also found that the lessee did not notify the lessor within a reasonable time and did not give the lessor a reasonable oppor - tunity to make the necessary repairs. Instead, when Nissan requested an inspection, Mr Skierka refused and leased a BMW. In the Court’s words, “the plain - tiffs took justice into their own hands,” which further justified the dismissal of the claim. This case reaffirms the importance of providing notice of a defect and an opportunity for the merchant or manufacturer to remedy it. Hajmanoochehry v Beaupré Capitale Chrysler inc ., 2026 QCCS 754 Rendered on 9 March 2026 by the Superior Court of Québec, this is the first reported judgment in Québec to grant a declaration that a vehicle is a “seriously
defective automobile” within the meaning of Section 53.1 CPA and to order the cancellation of the sale as a result. The plaintiff purchased a Jeep Grand Cherokee 4xe from Beaupré Capitale Chrysler inc. on 31 Janu - ary 2023. The claim was filed on 22 January 2026. The defendant dealership failed to answer the claim, resulting in the matter proceeding by default. The manufacturer was not sued in this case. The plaintiff alleged two categories of serious and recurring defects, which the Court accepted. First, the vehicle’s heating system never functioned. Given Québec winters, the Court noted this was not merely a comfort issue: the inability to defrost windows posed a direct safety risk, and the plaintiff suffered frostbite and numbness in his legs during long trips. Second, a dashboard warning light appeared intermittently, sometimes causing a sudden and complete loss of engine power that forced the plaintiff to pull over to the side of the road, turn off the engine, and restart it. This was also found to be a safety hazard. Applying the framework from the Court of Appeal’s leading decision in Fortin v Mazda Canada Inc., 2016 QCCA 31, the Superior Court confirmed that a defect under the CPA ‒ even in the context of the new “lemon law” ‒ must meet the four criteria applicable to latent defects under the Civil Code of Québec: • have a latent cause; • be sufficiently serious; • be unknown to the buyer at the time of purchase; and • have existed prior to the sale. It held that all four criteria were satisfied in this par - ticular case. The Court granted the plaintiff’s request for cancel - lation of the sale and ordered the full refund of the purchase price as well as damages of CAD11,000. No punitive damages were sought or awarded. Although the Court did not explicitly analyse the conditions of Section 53.1 CPA, it declared that the vehicle was a “seriously defective automobile,” which means it must now be permanently identified as such on any subse - quent resale or advertisement.
71 CHAMBERS.COM
Powered by FlippingBook