Following a partial summary judgment decision granting rescission under s. 6 of the Arthur Wishart Act (Franchise Disclosure), 2000, the court addressed costs of the motion.
Although the moving party achieved partial success, the court declined to award costs immediately.
The court noted uncertainty regarding the quantum of damages to be determined on a reference and the potential impact of competing Rule 49 settlement offers.
Given ongoing issues including quantification of damages, unresolved liability of another defendant, a counterclaim, and a third‑party claim, the court held it would be inappropriate to determine costs at this stage.
The issue of liability, scale, and quantum of costs for the motion was therefore reserved to the trial judge ultimately disposing of the matter.
