Claudio Romeo Aiello

In an addendum on costs following prior motion reasons, the court determined the appropriate scale and quantum of costs payable by the unsuccessful defendants.

The moving party sought substantial indemnity costs of $30,336, while the responding defendants argued for no costs or reduced partial indemnity costs.

Applying s. 131 of the Courts of Justice Act, Rule 57.01(1), proportionality, and the fair-and-reasonable standard, the court rejected substantial indemnity as unwarranted in the circumstances.

After considering mixed success, conduct that unnecessarily lengthened the proceeding, and reasonableness of quantum, the court fixed all-inclusive partial indemnity costs at $20,000 payable within 30 days.

This addendum on costs addresses the determination of costs following an interim motion.

The defendant, Temagami Barge Limited, sought partial indemnity costs of $25,520.68 from the plaintiff.

The plaintiff, His Majesty the King in Right of Ontario, argued for no costs or reduced costs due to mixed results and a vague costs outline.

The court, applying the principles of fairness, reasonableness, and proportionality under section 131 of the Courts of Justice Act and Rule 57.01(1) of the Rules of Civil Procedure, fixed the costs award at $12,500, inclusive of fees, disbursements, and HST, payable by the plaintiff to Temagami Barge Limited.

Robert Reed, a former employee and minority shareholder of Cooper-Gordon Ltd. (CGL), brought a motion for leave to appeal an arbitral decision on questions of law under s. 45 of the Arbitrations Act, 1991.

Reed sought to appeal the arbitrator's findings on wrongful dismissal notice period, unpaid bonuses and RRSP contributions, share valuation, and claims for punitive damages or oppression remedy.

The court granted leave to appeal on two issues: the mathematical error in calculating the wrongful dismissal notice period (one month difference) and the arbitrator's omission to address Reed's claims for unpaid RRSP and bonus payments from 2016-2019.

Leave was denied for the share valuation, oppression/punitive damages, and procedural fairness claims, as these were deemed questions of fact or mixed fact and law, or lacked sufficient legal merit.

The defendants brought a motion for security for costs against the plaintiff, a real estate brokerage, which admitted having insufficient assets in Ontario to cover a potential costs award, though its shareholders were not impecunious.

The court, applying a holistic approach under Rule 56.01(1) of the Rules of Civil Procedure, determined that it was just to order security for costs.

The plaintiff's claim was found to be arguable but not demonstrated to have a good chance of success on the merits.

The court granted the motion, ordering the plaintiff to post $60,000 for one group of defendants and $45,000 for another, covering the pleading and discovery stages, and awarded motion costs to the successful defendants.

This case involved an application and counter-application concerning a commercial sub-lease and an option to purchase real property.

The Landlord (2405416 Ontario Ltd.) sought a declaration that the Tenant (2405490 Ontario Inc.) had defaulted on the sub-lease, terminating it, and obligating the Tenant to sell its business to the Landlord.

The Tenant counter-applied for a declaration compelling the Landlord to sell the premises under the option to purchase, and for damages for rent paid.

The court found that the Tenant was not in default regarding rent payments or renovations, interpreting the lease's rent commencement date as conditional on the closing of an Asset Purchase Agreement and the issuance of a body-rub licence.

The court also found the Landlord's complaints to be a pretext for refusing to comply with its obligations.

The Tenant's counter-application was granted in part, affirming its right to purchase the property, but its claim for damages for rent paid was dismissed.

The Landlord's application was dismissed.