Jane Yoo

This decision addresses the determination of costs following a one-day trial where the Plaintiffs were awarded judgment against the Hicks Defendants.

Both parties sought costs, with the Plaintiffs claiming $64,325 and the Hicks Defendants claiming substantial indemnity costs from the date of their 2015 offer to settle.

The court considered multiple offers to settle, finding the Hicks Defendants' 2015 offer rescinded by a subsequent 2016 offer and invalid due to a material error.

Applying Rule 49.10 and Rule 57.01(1) of the Rules of Civil Procedure, the court awarded the Hicks Defendants partial indemnity costs of $10,000 from May 12, 2016.

The Plaintiffs were awarded $7,500 for Ezzat F. Gindi's self-representation costs and $11,000 for legal fees incurred.

After offsetting, the Hicks Defendants were ordered to pay the Plaintiffs a net sum of $8,500, inclusive of disbursements and HST.

The plaintiffs brought an action against their former solicitors (Hicks Defendants) for professional negligence, alleging that the solicitors missed a limitation period for an action against previous solicitors (Arnone Defendants) concerning the purchase of contaminated land.

The Hicks Defendants admitted liability for the missed limitation period, and the trial proceeded solely to assess the plaintiffs' damages.

The court awarded damages for environmental remediation costs and a nominal amount for the inconvenience of managing the remediation, totaling $57,712.31.

However, claims for loss of property value, real estate commission on a failed sale, roof replacement costs, excess mortgage interest, and mental distress were dismissed due to lack of expert evidence, legal prohibitions (for commission), or being deemed not reasonably foreseeable consequences of the negligence.