B. Gray

Following a trial where the plaintiff was awarded $250,000 in damages for oppression, the court determined the issues of prejudgment interest and costs.

The court rejected the plaintiff's expert calculation for prejudgment interest, instead applying the Courts of Justice Act rate from the date the cause of action arose.

The court awarded the plaintiff substantial indemnity costs, finding the defendants' conduct in taking excess compensation and deliberately withholding information to be egregious and reprehensible.

The defendants' Rule 49 offer did not apply because the judgment, which included substantial indemnity costs, was more favourable than the offer.

Costs were fixed at $413,000.

The self-represented plaintiff commenced nine separate actions against 30 defendants, including doctors, nurses, physiotherapists, and academic advisors, alleging medical malpractice and negligence.

The plaintiff, who had been diagnosed with schizophrenia but refused to accept the diagnosis or take medication, claimed the defendants failed to properly diagnose and treat his physical injuries and ignored his beliefs about synchronicities.

The defendants brought motions for summary judgment to dismiss the actions.

The Superior Court of Justice granted the motions, finding no genuine issue for trial as the plaintiff failed to provide any expert evidence to support his claims, while the defendants provided uncontradicted expert evidence that they met or exceeded the standard of care.

The court also found the actions to be frivolous, vexatious, and an abuse of process, and ordered the plaintiff to pay costs of $1,500 to each defendant.