Who is Carol Ann Crawford?

Carol Ann Crawford is an Ontario lawyer (In Private Practice) with 3 court cases on record from 2013 to 2023.

What courts has Carol Ann Crawford appeared in?

Carol Ann Crawford has appeared in Superior Court of Justice.

How many cases has Carol Ann Crawford handled?

Carol Ann Crawford has 3 cases on record from 2013 to 2023.

What judges has Carol Ann Crawford appeared before?

Carol Ann Crawford has most frequently appeared before Justice Adriana Doyle, Justice Robert N. Beaudoin, Justice Stanley J. Kershman.

Carol Ann Crawford | Lawyer | Gowling WLG (Canada) LLP

3 total

Torgersrud v. Lightstone, 2023 ONSC 1603

This is a costs endorsement following a two-day focused hearing where the applicant was entirely successful in setting aside Quebec matrimonial instruments.

The applicant sought costs of over $400,000, while the respondent proposed approximately $184,000.

The court, applying principles of reasonableness and proportionality, awarded the applicant $200,000 in fees and $65,106.73 in disbursements.

The court noted that neither party's offer to settle contained a true element of compromise, as the underlying issue was binary, and found some of the applicant's claimed hours for general research and costs submissions to be excessive and disproportionate, despite the high stakes and complexity of proving foreign law.

SCJMar 13, 2023

Respondent Counsel

Obam Dallaire v Dallaire, 2017 ONSC 3998

The Applicant sought various relief, primarily an order for ongoing and retroactive child and spousal support, a parenting schedule for their son, and full financial disclosure from the Respondent.

The court declined to sanction the Respondent for disclosure issues, finding his pursuit of jurisdiction not in bad faith and sufficient information provided for support issues.

The parenting schedule was adjourned due to insufficient evidence.

The court ordered retroactive child and spousal support from July 1, 2016, calculating amounts based on the parties' incomes and applying the Spousal Support Advisory Guidelines, noting the high-income payor principles.

The Respondent's cash flow arguments were rejected, emphasizing support obligations over personal acquisitions.

SCJJul 6, 2017

Applicant Counsel

Michael Potter v. Véronique Dhieux, 2013 ONSC 664

Following a four‑day family law trial concerning the appropriate school for the parties’ child, the successful party sought substantial indemnity costs exceeding $234,000 based on offers to settle and alleged unreasonable conduct by the other party.

The court confirmed the presumption under Rule 24 of the Family Law Rules that the successful party is entitled to costs but emphasized that the quantum must remain fair and reasonable in light of the nature of the dispute, the complexity of the issue, and the parties’ financial circumstances.

The court found both parties acted reasonably and rejected claims for full recovery, significantly reducing counsel’s hourly rates and the hours claimed.

Applying the reasonableness principle and considering Rule 24 factors, the court fixed fees at $73,964.15 plus disbursements.

A total costs award of $78,028.03 was ordered, payable in monthly instalments.

Applicant Counsel