Arthur Ayers

The applicant brought a motion for an interlocutory injunction to maintain his rent-geared-to-income subsidy pending the hearing of his application for judicial review.

The respondent municipality had terminated the subsidy because the applicant failed to report changes in his income.

Applying the RJR MacDonald test, the court found that while there was a serious issue to be tried, the applicant failed to establish irreparable harm, as his fears of eviction were speculative and financial losses could be compensated.

The balance of convenience favoured the municipality, which had a long waiting list for subsidized housing.

The motion was dismissed.

The proposed defendant, having successfully defended a motion by the plaintiffs to add him as a party after the limitation period expired, sought substantial indemnity costs of $9,910.28.

The plaintiffs argued for nominal costs.

The court awarded costs on a partial indemnity scale in the amount of $6,082.64, finding the proceeding was not complex but of significant importance to the proposed defendant.

The court declined to order costs jointly and severally against the plaintiffs' principal, as no evidence was presented to justify such an exceptional order.