Chris G. Paliare

Following the abandonment of a motion seeking court approval of a third‑party litigation funding agreement in a proposed class proceeding, the respondents sought costs under Rule 37.09(3) of the Rules of Civil Procedure.

The applicant argued that the costs decision should be deferred to the certification motion, that no costs should be awarded due to the novelty of the issues, or alternatively that a reduced amount should be ordered.

The court held that the normal rule applies that a responding party is entitled to costs when a motion is abandoned.

While costs were warranted, the amount claimed on a partial indemnity basis was excessive.

The court reduced the award and ordered costs payable to the respondents in the amount of $7,000, all inclusive.

The plaintiff brought an urgent motion seeking injunctive relief and an Anton Piller order against former employees and a competing corporation.

Evidence indicated that one former employee downloaded thousands of confidential corporate files prior to leaving employment and that the defendants were using the information to compete for the plaintiff’s principal customer.

Applying the three‑part test for interlocutory injunctions under the Courts of Justice Act and the Rules of Civil Procedure as articulated in RJR‑MacDonald Inc. v. Canada (Attorney General), the court found a serious issue to be tried, irreparable harm to the plaintiff’s business, and that the balance of convenience favoured the plaintiff.

The court held that the defendants’ conduct arguably breached contractual confidentiality obligations, restrictive covenants, and duties of confidence.

Injunctive relief restraining the defendants’ conduct was granted.

A corporation sought an order under the Solicitors Act referring a law firm’s legal accounts to assessment.

The corporation had indemnified a former executive for defence costs in regulatory proceedings and had paid most of the law firm’s accounts over a two‑and‑a‑half‑year period.

The court held that accounts paid more than twelve months before the application were final accounts and therefore statute‑barred from assessment absent fraud or misconduct.

Accounts paid within twelve months were not subject to assessment because the applicant failed to establish “special circumstances.” However, three recent unpaid accounts were referred to assessment as it was just and equitable given the breakdown in the parties’ relationship.