3 total
Costs fixed at $20,000 following successful summary judgment motion dismissing action as statute-barred.
Following the dismissal of the plaintiff's action on a motion for summary judgment due to an expired limitation period, the parties could not agree on costs.
The successful defendants sought $30,044.19, while the plaintiff suggested $15,000.
The court considered the principle of proportionality and the timing of the summary judgment motion, ultimately fixing costs payable by the plaintiff to the defendants at $20,000 all-inclusive.
Summary judgment granted dismissing defective sunroom claim as statute-barred under the Limitations Act.
The plaintiff purchased a sunroom installed by the defendant in 2001 and experienced severe problems with it during the first winter.
The plaintiff commenced an action for rescission of the contract in December 2010.
The defendant moved for summary judgment, arguing the action was statute-barred.
The court granted the motion, finding that the cause of action was discovered by the end of the winter of 2001/2002, making the six-year limitation period under the 1990 Limitations Act applicable.
Even under the 2002 Limitations Act, the court found the action was out of time, as the plaintiff knew or ought to have known that a legal proceeding was appropriate by February 2007 at the latest.
Appeal of joint custody and educational support order dismissed as consistent with child's best interests.
The appellant mother appealed a trial judge's order awarding joint custody of the child to both parents and establishing a mechanism for determining private tutoring.
The Court of Appeal dismissed the appeal, finding that the joint custody order was consistent with the best interests of the child, the parties' initial separation agreement, and the recommendation of the Children's Lawyer.
The court also upheld the tutoring provision as a common-sense mechanism to identify the best educational support for the child.
