3 total
Costs of $19,059.40 awarded to successful applicant who beat her offer to settle.
The applicant was previously successful in an application to cancel a matrimonial home designation registered by the respondent, which had interfered with her mortgage renewal.
The parties made written submissions on costs.
The court found that the applicant made a reasonable offer to settle and obtained an order as favourable as her offer, triggering the costs consequences under Rule 18(14) of the Family Law Rules.
The court rejected the respondent's argument that costs should await the outcome of his application to set aside the separation agreement.
Costs were fixed at $18,500 plus disbursements, payable forthwith.
Assessment upheld; no reviewable error in quantum meruit fee determination.
The applicant client moved under Rule 54.09(2) to oppose confirmation of a Solicitors Act assessment of criminal defence accounts rendered under an unwritten alleged block-fee retainer.
The court held that review of an assessment officer's decision is limited to questions of principle, palpable and overriding error, or an amount so grossly improper as to warrant intervention.
Applying the quantum meruit framework and the Cohen factors, the court found no reviewable error in the assessment officer's treatment of research time, travel time, complexity, responsibility, skill, result achieved, or client expectations.
The report and certificate of assessment were confirmed, leaving the client liable for the remaining assessed balance.
Summary judgment granted in part
The defendant Jade Antonson brought a motion for summary judgment to dismiss a subrogated claim by the plaintiff's insurer.
The insurer alleged that a fire, which destroyed the plaintiff's building occupied by the defendants as tenants, was caused by the negligence of the co-tenant Michael Joubert.
Antonson argued that the plaintiff could not prove Joubert caused the fire or that his actions were negligent.
The plaintiff opposed the motion, asserting that key facts were in dispute, necessitating a trial.
The court dismissed the motion for summary judgment, finding that genuine issues of material fact existed regarding the fire's origin and the condition of an "ashtray" pail, which prevented a fair and just determination on the merits without a full trial.
