4 total
Appeal allowed; law firm not removed for conflict of interest where former client dropped objection.
The plaintiff appealed an order removing its law firm as solicitors of record due to a conflict of interest.
The firm had previously provided employment advice to a former employee of the defendants, who was originally named as a defendant in the action but later discontinued.
The motions judge found a risk that confidential information provided by the former employee could be misused.
The Divisional Court allowed the appeal, holding that because the former client had settled his issues and dropped his objection to the firm acting, there was no longer a basis to remove the firm to protect his confidential information.
A dissenting judge would have dismissed the appeal on the basis of maintaining public confidence in the administration of justice.
Successful party awarded reduced partial indemnity costs after failed settlement challenge.
Costs were determined following motions concerning the validity of minutes of settlement and enforcement of judgment.
A defendant by counterclaim had unsuccessfully sought to set aside settlement minutes on the basis of alleged mental incapacity, while the bank successfully obtained judgment under those minutes.
The bank sought substantial indemnity costs exceeding $64,000, arguing the motion lacked merit and required significant preparation including expert psychiatric evidence.
The court held that although the bank was successful, substantial indemnity costs were not warranted and awarded partial indemnity costs of $19,900 against the unsuccessful moving party.
A co-defendant who supported the bank’s position was denied any costs because his participation duplicated the bank’s submissions.
Disciplinary costs award was enforceable by contractual action against a former member.
The appellant challenged summary judgment enforcing a disciplinary costs award made by a securities self-regulatory organization after professional misconduct proceedings.
The issue was whether the organization could sue a former member in breach of contract to recover the unpaid costs award, and whether s. 9 of the Recognition Order barred that remedy by treating costs like fines or settlements.
The court held that prior authority recognizing contractual enforcement of disciplinary sanctions applied equally to costs awards, and that the plain wording of s. 9 was limited to fines and settlements.
The appeal was dismissed and appeal costs were awarded to the respondent.
Regulatory disciplinary costs enforceable through civil action as contractual obligation.
The plaintiff self-regulatory organization brought a motion for summary judgment to recover $80,000 in costs ordered by its disciplinary hearing panel against a former registrant.
The defendant had previously been found guilty of misconduct involving undisclosed financial interests in client accounts and was permanently banned and fined by the disciplinary panel.
Appeals to the securities regulator and the Divisional Court were dismissed, and the defendant failed to pay the ordered costs.
The court held that membership in the regulatory organization created a contractual obligation to comply with its by-laws, rules, and disciplinary orders, including costs awards.
The court concluded that the costs order was enforceable through a civil action for breach of contract.
