3 total
The successful respondent was awarded partial indemnity costs because her settlement offers did not strictly comply with Rule 49.10.
This endorsement addresses the costs arising from an application where the applicants sought a declaration of adverse possession over disputed lands.
The court previously granted the applicants ownership of a portion of the lands (Common Grounds) but not the entirety.
The respondent, deemed the successful party for costs, sought substantial indemnity costs for both the current and a prior related application.
The applicants sought partial indemnity costs.
The court awarded the respondent partial indemnity costs, finding that the respondent's offers to settle did not meet the requirements of Rule 49.10 and that the applicants' conduct did not warrant substantial indemnity costs.
The parties were ordered to equally share the costs of implementing the judgment.
Adverse possession was granted for a conceded land portion but denied for the remainder.
The applicants sought ownership by adverse possession of a triangular parcel of land ("Disputed Lands") on their property's eastern border.
The respondent, the registered owner of the adjoining property, conceded a portion of these lands ("Common Grounds") but disputed the remainder.
The court found that the applicants established adverse possession of the "Common Grounds" due to their continuous, open, and exclusive use, and the mutual mistake regarding ownership.
However, the court found insufficient evidence to establish adverse possession of the balance of the "Disputed Lands." The judgment declared the applicants as lawful owners of the "Common Grounds" and ordered the necessary land registry amendments.
The court ordered the defendant to pay $71,215 for breaching a dance studio purchase agreement and wrongfully terminating the plaintiff's employment.
This case involved a contract dispute between two dance studio owners regarding the sale of a business.
The defendant, a former student, agreed to purchase the plaintiff's studio space, chattels, and student body for $45,000, hire the plaintiff as a teacher, and allow the plaintiff's daughter to dance for free.
A dispute arose over HVAC repairs and the lease assignment, leading the plaintiff to break her lease to facilitate the defendant's occupancy.
The defendant subsequently repudiated the agreement, refused payment, and terminated the plaintiff's employment.
The court found the defendant breached the agreement, relying on principles of estoppel and substantial performance, and dismissed the defendant's counterclaim.
The plaintiff was awarded $45,000 for the business, $21,760 for wrongful termination, and $4,455 for the daughter's dance lessons.
