Dawood Ahmad

The moving party brought a motion for the production of documents and information relating to two of the responding party's accounts: an investment account and a bank account.

The court found that the responding party had sufficiently answered the request regarding the investment account.

Regarding the bank account, the court ordered the responding party to provide an affidavit clarifying whether the account into which deposits were made was closed, or whether the account from which corresponding withdrawals were made was closed.

The motion was largely dismissed, and the responding party was awarded costs of $2,000.

Following a previous endorsement, the successful defendant sought costs on a partial indemnity scale.

The plaintiff opposed the costs award.

Applying the principles from Boucher and Rule 57, the court determined that the fixing of costs is not a mechanical exercise but must result in a fair and reasonable amount.

The court fixed the defendant's costs at $7,500 inclusive of fees, disbursements, and HST.

The defendant brought a motion for summary judgment to dismiss the plaintiff's negligence claim regarding a defective fireplace installation, arguing the claim was statute-barred.

The plaintiff argued the limitation period did not begin until the defendant refused to remediate the issue.

The court found that the plaintiff had actual knowledge of the material facts to base an allegation of negligence upon receiving an inspection report in December 2010.

As the action was not commenced until November 2014, well beyond the two-year limitation period, the court granted the defendant's motion and dismissed the action.

Following a proceeding, the successful defendant submitted a costs outline.

The court considered the factors under Rule 57 of the Rules of Civil Procedure, including proportionality, time spent, and complexity.

Applying the principles from Boucher and Davies, the court fixed costs at an amount fair and reasonable for the unsuccessful party to pay.

The plaintiffs were ordered to pay $3,500 all-inclusive to the successful defendant.