Balpreet Lailna

Following a successful summary judgment motion by the plaintiff, the parties submitted written costs submissions.

The defendants argued that each party should bear its own costs because the plaintiff's success did not exceed a settlement offer.

The court rejected this argument, noting the outcome was substantially in the plaintiff's favour and the relief was only modified to minimize prejudice to the defendants.

The court awarded the plaintiff costs of $12,000 plus HST on a substantial indemnity basis due to delays caused by the defendants.

The plaintiff mortgagee brought a motion for summary judgment to take possession of mortgaged properties after the defendants defaulted on payments.

The defendant mortgagor opposed the motion, arguing the mortgage was unenforceable because he did not receive independent legal advice before signing.

The court granted summary judgment, finding no genuine issue for trial as the defendant was of sound mind, there was no evidence of undue influence or fraud, and the lack of independent legal advice did not vitiate consent.

The court ordered the properties to be sold by power of sale, but permitted the defendant to remain in the residence until June 1, 2018.