Following a prior decision dismissing the action against an insurer defendant, the court addressed costs allocation among the parties.
The plaintiff had added the insurer as a defendant to ensure coverage but offered to release the insurer if other defendants admitted minimal liability.
The remaining defendants refused, and the insurer brought a successful summary judgment motion resulting in dismissal of the claim against it.
Exercising discretion under s. 131 of the Courts of Justice Act and Rule 57 of the Rules of Civil Procedure, the court apportioned costs between the plaintiff and the co-defendants, finding that both contributed to the insurer remaining in the action.
Costs of the action and the summary judgment motion were divided proportionally between them.
