5 total
The court awarded the defendants $75,000 in costs following a simplified proceeding, balancing mixed success and a favourable offer to settle.
The court determined costs following a simplified proceeding trial where both the plaintiff's claim (adverse possession, prescriptive easement) and the defendants' counterclaim (injunction, trespass damages) were dismissed.
The defendants sought substantial indemnity costs of $172,028.97.
The plaintiff argued for no costs due to divided success or the Rule 76.12.1(1) limit.
The court found the Rule 76.12.1(2) exception applied as the action commenced before January 1, 2020.
Considering mixed success, the defendants' more favourable offer to settle, and the principles of proportionality and cost minimization in simplified proceedings (Rule 76), the court awarded the defendants $75,000.00 inclusive of disbursements and HST.
The Court of Appeal upheld a summary judgment enforcing an unlimited guarantee, rejecting the appellant's unsupported claim of an oral misrepresentation.
The appellant appealed a summary judgment decision granting judgment on a guarantee in favour of the respondent credit union.
The appellant's defence was that a representative of the credit union had represented to her that she would only be responsible for 25% of the entire loan, despite the documents she signed stating the guarantee was unlimited.
The motion judge rejected the appellant's evidence of misrepresentation and granted summary judgment in accordance with the terms of the guarantee.
The Court of Appeal upheld the decision, finding no error in the motion judge's determination that there was no genuine issue for trial.
Costs of successful summary judgment motion fixed at $10,500 based on fairness and reasonableness.
Following a successful summary judgment motion where the plaintiff was awarded $153,241.40, the plaintiff sought full indemnity costs of $15,674.22 based on a contractual right.
The individual defendant argued costs should be fixed on a partial indemnity basis at $7,500.
Applying the principles from Boucher and Rule 57.01, the court found the plaintiff's hours slightly excessive for the complexity of the matter and fixed costs at $10,500.00, payable jointly and severally by the defendants.
Summary judgment granted enforcing unlimited personal guarantee where guarantor failed to read loan documents.
The plaintiff credit union brought a motion for summary judgment against the corporate defendant and the individual defendant based on a small business credit agreement and a personal guarantee.
The corporate defendant conceded liability.
The individual defendant argued her liability was limited to 25% of the loan based on alleged misrepresentations by the plaintiff's advisor.
The court found the guarantee was clearly unlimited and the defendant had not read the documents or sought independent legal advice.
Summary judgment was granted against both defendants for the full outstanding amount.
CRA deemed trust for source deductions takes priority over union's BIA super-priority claims in receivership.
The Receiver brought a motion to distribute funds to the secured creditor, RBC, and to approve its fees.
The Union opposed, claiming a super-priority for unpaid pension and other benefits under the BIA over all companies in the receivership, and sought to claw back the Receiver's fees.
The court held that the CRA's deemed trust for unremitted source deductions under the Income Tax Act takes priority over the Union's BIA super-priority claims.
The court also rejected the Union's attempt to extend its claims to other corporate entities in the group, finding no evidence they were related employers or participated in the pension plan.
The Union's attempt to claw back the Receiver's fees was dismissed as an impermissible collateral attack.
