On July 10, 2023, the couple got married and it is the Le Montagnais hotel in Chicoutimi which is responsible for serving the cocktail and the supper. They consider that the hotel has failed in its obligations compared to the services requested and reimburses only part of the invoice.
In front of the court of small debts, they explain that a vegetable soup was served rather than a vegetable cream and the dessert was served in a hot plate, making it founded before ingestion. According to them, the meal was served with 1:45 a.m. and the manager was absent during reception.
In addition, they criticize the hotelier for having placed a majority of tables that can accommodate ten people, rather than twelve, as they had claimed. The couple also report that the available rooms were not all located in the same sector.
No evidence
The Le Montagnais hotel was therefore to demonstrate the merits of its invoicing and on its side, the couple had to demonstrate that the contractual commitments were not respected. The majority of the reasons for recrimination put forward by the couple have not been proven.
“There is no evidence that a vegetable cream has been retained. […] As for desserts, the court retains the testimony of the hotel representative to the effect that the latter are kept in the refrigerators to the service. Naturally, after this step, a cast iron process starts. On the absence of the manager the same evening, I do not see, neither in the evidence, nor in the documents produced, of commitment in this regard, any more than I could conclude in this absence the same evening, “writes Judge Paul Guimond in his judgment rendered on June 25.
Overall, a single element advanced by the bride and groom is retained by the court, the availability of tables that can accommodate twelve people.
“Indeed, the memory aid provided by the hotel to customers reports the availability of eight tables, ten or twelve people, but the number is not indicated and there is no reserve. It is therefore legitimate to believe that there are sufficient quantities. […] In addition to the disappointment in this regard, this has caused certain additional costs of which I did not have the benefit of knowing the exact amount, ”said the judge.
Thus, Judge Guimond estimated the damage caused to $ 500. This sum will be reduced by the balance due by the couple, who is sentenced to paying a little more than $ 2,400 to the hotel.
