By Marie-Hélène Beaudoin
I will be brief, for once, in bringing to your attention the case of Alexandris c. Express Finance Investissement Inc., 2012 QCCA 1955. Here, the Appellant sought revocation of two judgments in the context of a hypothecary recourse. Both the Superior Court and the Court of Appeal found that she acted negligently, and that her behaviour could not justify a revocation. More, below.
Regarding Plaintiff’s lack of knowledge of French, the Court of Appeal stated the following:
«  The appellant, who has been living in Quebec for 30 years, did ignore both the prior notice and the motion claiming that she does not understand French. […]
«  A lack of sufficient knowledge of the French language may excuse the inability of the appellant to fully understand the content of the prior notice and the motion for forced surrender that was served personally on her. However, it does not justify a failure to seek counsel and act accordingly within the shortest delay. The same is true once she was served a copy of the judgement. »
Being “very busy or sick at the time“ and not having “a chance to take care of her affairs” was also dismissed as not being a serious ground for revocation.
The complete text of the decision is available here.