![[VIDÉOS] Large debts to pay: a fake conspiracy lawyer declared a vexatious litigator](https://i0.wp.com/m1.quebecormedia.com/emp/emp/Capture_d_e_cran_le_2024_11_19_a_14.16.33c69bce00-2e2d-4765-b21d-8e2cdd001e3f_ORIGINAL.jpg?fit=%2C&ssl=1 "[VIDÉOS] Large debts to pay: a fake conspiracy lawyer declared a vexatious litigator")
A conspirator from Montérégie, who increases the number of legal procedures to avoid paying his heavy debts by passing himself off as a lawyer in court, has just been declared a vexatious litigant.
• Also read: [VIDÉO] Romana Didulo: a Quebec couple loses their house because of the conspiratorial “queen”
“Serge Lapierre’s debt is significant and the procedures he presents aim to avoid execution. […] The Court is fully convinced that the gentleman represents a contentious litigant who must be supervised,” judge Katheryne Alexandra Desfossés ruled this month.
Mr. Lapierre has filed more than twenty court proceedings since March 2022. Photo taken from Serge Lapierre’s Facebook
In his judgment rendered to the Superior Court, we learn that Serge Lapierre has filed more than twenty proceedings before the courts since March 2022. This 61-year-old Quebecer, living in Saint-Antoine-sur-Richelieu, is notably involved in a long legal saga with Pareclemco inc.
This real estate development company has been waiting since 2019 for Mr. Lapierre to repay a loan of more than $600,000. The courts even forced the sixty-year-old to repay his debts, but he appealed the judgments… still without success. Pareclemco inc. therefore filed a request in Superior Court to have him declared a quarrelsome litigant.
“There is reason to grant the request and declare Mr. Lapierre a quarrelsome litigant,” the judge finally concluded, while emphasizing “that he is showing stubbornness.”
Note that the 61-year-old Quebecer also put his pretty house in Saint-Antoine-sur-Richelieu up for sale recently for the sum of $630,000, an amount equivalent to his debt to Pareclemco inc.
The house of the argumentative litigator is now for sale for the sum of $629,000. Screenshot of the site www.realtor.ca
Not a real lawyer
Surprisingly in this case, Serge Lapierre also received two fines totaling $5,000 last September because he pretended to be a lawyer in court.
“He illegally prepared and wrote for his company Rénovations Lapierre, a request to oppose seizure in the context of this proceeding,” we can read in the decision of magistrate Katheryne Alexandra Desfossés.
Website of the sixty-year-old, who calls himself an “expert in renovations”. Screenshot of the website renovationsergelapierre.com
This handyman, who calls himself a “renovation expert,” also sued Ski Bromont and its president in 2022. He demanded $45,000 from them in compensation. Mr. Lapierre, not vaccinated against COVID-19, claimed to have suffered damage at the time since the vaccination passport was mandatory to access the mountain.
In November 2021, Mr. Lapierre publicly criticized the Ski Bromont center on Facebook for requiring a vaccination passport. Screenshot from Serge Lapierre’s Facebook
His request had been rejected by the court which can “dismiss futile requests”, the judge had specified in this case.
He films himself without a mask
During the pandemic, Serge Lapierre published several videos on his Facebook page where he participated in demonstrations against health measures and where he entered businesses without a mask. However, face coverings were mandatory at that time under government decrees.
“I explain to them that I don’t wear a mask. They’re all going crazy,” the Quebecer proudly filmed himself, while he was shopping in a Maxi in April 2022 and employees asked him to leave the store (see video below).
The Journal contacted Mr. Lapierre to obtain his reaction to his new label of quarrelsome litigator. “I prefer not to comment, as I am going to appeal the judgment,” he said on the phone.
Video filmed by Serge Lapierre where he refuses to wear the mask imposed by the court:
Do you have any information to share with us about this story?
Write to us at or call us directly at 1 800-63SCOOP.
What are the criteria used to label someone as a “quarrelsome litigant” in legal contexts?
1. Can you tell us more about the label of ”quarrelsome litigant” and how it came about in this case?
2. How do you think individuals like Mr. Lapierre view the role of government in enforcing public health measures during the pandemic?
3. Do you think there is a difference between civil disobedience and disruptive behavior during times of crisis?
4. Do you think mandatory mask-wearing policies are effective in preventing the spread of COVID-19, and why or why not?
5. In your opinion, what are the potential long-term consequences of individuals refusing to comply with public health guidelines during a pandemic?
6. How do you think businesses should handle customers who refuse to comply with their mask policies?
7. How can the judicial system balance upholding the law with respect for individual rights during times of crisis?
During the pandemic, there was a lot of debate about the effectiveness and necessity of mask-wearing policies. How do you think this issue has impacted society as a whole?
Do you think individuals have a responsibility to take precautions against the spread of infectious diseases, and if so, what steps should they take beyond simply following government guidelines?
