J.D. Martin

The parties were unable to resolve the costs of a motion and cross-motion.

The moving defendants sought substantial indemnity costs, arguing the plaintiffs' claim lacked merit and delayed the proceeding.

The court rejected the request for substantial indemnity costs, finding no sanctionable conduct by the plaintiffs.

After considering divided success, excessive hours claimed, and unsubstantiated disbursements, the court fixed costs payable by the plaintiffs to the moving defendants at $10,000 inclusive of HST and disbursements.

The defendants, Mohammad Kazem Abazari and Master Venus Inc., moved for an order to pay out mortgage proceeds held in trust and for security for costs against the plaintiffs.

The plaintiffs cross-moved for the funds to be paid to them or preserved.

The court found that the prior interim preservation order had expired and the plaintiffs failed to establish the criteria for a new preservation order under Rule 45.02, particularly a serious issue to be tried regarding their claim to the specific fund.

The court dismissed the defendants' request for security for costs but stayed the plaintiffs' action pending full payment of an outstanding costs award from a prior unsuccessful motion.

The Master addressed a dispute over costs and interest following the full payment and discharge of a mortgage.

The defendant, Juleth Dawson, sought a credit for amounts paid, including a higher post-default interest rate and legal fees incurred by the mortgagee in an unsuccessful motion to add her spouse, Rod Byrnes, to the action.

The Master clarified an earlier misunderstanding regarding the application of Rule 64 (Mortgage Actions) and applied Rule 1.04 (proportionality).

The Master found it inappropriate to grant full indemnity for costs of a motion lost by the lender and for initiating a second action against a party who was subsequently dismissed with no costs.

An overall net credit of $6500 was fixed to be repaid to Juleth Dawson.