4 total
Court fixes partial indemnity costs and allows accountant witness fees as disbursements.
Following a dispute over costs after the underlying proceeding, the applicants sought costs on a substantial indemnity basis, while the respondents argued for a significantly reduced amount and objected to certain disbursements.
The court held that substantial indemnity costs were not warranted because there was no reprehensible conduct in the litigation.
On a partial indemnity basis, the court reviewed the hours claimed by counsel and rejected arguments that the applicants’ legal team engaged in excessive duplication, although some preparation time was considered excessive.
The court also allowed disbursements for professional witnesses, finding that accountants called as fact witnesses were entitled to compensation for their time in preparing affidavits, attending cross‑examinations, and testifying.
Total costs payable were fixed at $58,034 inclusive of HST.
Failure to raise adjustment within contractual deadline barred inventory claim.
The applicants sought an order permitting their accountants to finalize draft closing statements following the sale of shares in a technology company.
The respondents argued that an adjustment for allegedly obsolete inventory should be considered and requested appointment of a third accountant under the purchase agreement.
The court found that the respondents failed to raise the inventory issue within the contractual 15‑day period for commenting on draft closing statements and had not engaged their own accountants to trigger the dispute‑resolution mechanism.
The court rejected arguments of waiver and declined to grant equitable relief from forfeiture under s. 98 of the Courts of Justice Act, finding the respondents’ conduct unreasonable and unsupported by evidence of a valid claim.
The application was granted and the draft closing statements were ordered finalized.
Implied easement found for shared pool and garbage facilities between adjacent apartment properties.
A dispute arose between owners of adjacent apartment buildings concerning access to a shared outdoor swimming pool and a garbage disposal facility located on the defendants’ property.
The plaintiff asserted that it held easement rights permitting continued use of the facilities based on the original design and joint development of the properties in the late 1960s.
The defendants argued the plaintiff had only a revocable licence and counterclaimed for trespass arising from construction activities on their land.
The court held that the evidence established an implied easement arising from the common intention of the original developers when the lands were severed and developed as a single complex.
The plaintiff therefore retained enforceable easement rights over the defendants’ land for both facilities, and the defendants’ trespass claim failed because the impugned acts were committed by independent contractors without the plaintiff’s control.
Appeal allowed; appellant entitled to unredacted shareholders' agreement before exercising stock options.
The appellant sought to exercise share options under the respondent's employee stock option plan and was required to execute an assumption agreement acknowledging receipt of the shareholders' agreement.
The respondent refused to provide the agreement, which the application judge found oppressive, ordering its production but allowing the redaction of Schedule A. The Court of Appeal allowed the appeal, finding that Schedule A contained more than just shareholder identities and was integral to the agreement, making it unjust to compel the appellant to exercise options without seeing it.
