2 total
The successful plaintiff in a property dispute was awarded reduced costs due to mixed results and settlement offers that did not beat the judgment.
The plaintiff sought substantial indemnity costs after being the more successful party at trial regarding property ownership and unjust enrichment claims.
The defendant argued for mixed results and that the plaintiff's offers were not more favourable.
The court found the plaintiff was the more successful party but noted mixed results and that the plaintiff's offers did not meet the Rule 49 threshold for substantial indemnity.
The court also considered the defendant's unreasonable conduct regarding the property listing.
Costs were awarded to the plaintiff on a partial indemnity basis, with a reduction for mixed results, totaling $17,573.05, payable from the defendant's share of the property sale proceeds.
Mother and daughter found to be true joint owners of property; resulting trust and unjust enrichment claims dismissed.
The plaintiff and defendant, mother and daughter, were joint registered owners of a residential property.
After their relationship broke down, the plaintiff sought an order for the sale of the property and equal division of proceeds.
The defendant claimed sole beneficial ownership based on resulting trust, arguing the plaintiff was merely a co-signor, or alternatively claimed unjust enrichment for unequal contributions.
The court found the plaintiff was a true joint legal and beneficial owner, having contributed to the down payment and assumed mortgage liability.
The court dismissed the unjust enrichment claim, finding juristic reason for any unequal contributions based on their shared living arrangements and agreements.
The property was ordered sold with proceeds divided equally, subject to specific accounting adjustments for joint debts.
