Bruce Hutchinson

Following a successful summary judgment motion dismissing a professional negligence action against former lawyers, the defendant law firm sought costs for both the summary judgment motion and the defence of the action.

The plaintiff was a self-represented litigant living on social assistance with significant personal debts and no ability to pay.

The court acknowledged that while the action was legally unsound, it was not frivolous and had been prosecuted respectfully and in good faith.

Exercising its discretion under the costs principles, the court declined to award even a symbolic costs amount given the plaintiff’s financial circumstances and the lack of practical utility in making an unenforceable order.

The defendant law firm moved for summary judgment dismissing a former client’s action for solicitor’s negligence arising from a failed motor vehicle personal injury claim.

The plaintiff alleged the lawyers mishandled the underlying litigation and caused her to lose at trial.

The court held that even if deficiencies in the lawyers’ conduct were assumed, the plaintiff could not prove that any breach caused her loss or that she lost a viable chance of success.

The evidence showed the poor trial outcome resulted from weaknesses in the plaintiff’s case rather than the lawyers’ conduct.

The plaintiff’s claim for repayment of legal fees was also barred by res judicata based on a prior court‑approved settlement of the fees dispute.